Jump to content

Talk:Gustavo Petro

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

Untitled

[edit]

I don't know enough about the subject to edit this article, but its tone is flagrantly hostile to the subject, and the bias is obvious. It's also poorly written, as if clumsily translated. 172.56.26.212 (talk) 05:42, 10 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Request for Comments

[edit]

There is an RfC on the question of using "Religion: None" vs. "Religion: None (atheist)" in the infobox on this and other similar pages.

The RfC is at Template talk:Infobox person#RfC: Religion infobox entries for individuals that have no religion.

Please help us determine consensus on this issue. --Guy Macon (talk) 00:51, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Gustavo Petro. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 07:48, 23 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Education

[edit]

Do we have any detailed reliable sources that cover education (fields of study, degrees earned, etc.) comprehensively? Xenophrenic (talk) 23:15, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Recent edits show a concerted effort to add disparaging information based on tabloids and other non-reliable sources, and also to add what appear to be "guilt-by-association" allegations such as this one. I've reverted those edits per WP:BLP. Xenophrenic (talk) 15:28, 2 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please raise your complaints to the ICIJ -- — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aldero (talk • contribs) 18:10, 15 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Panama Papers

[edit]

Gustavo Petro is explicitly mentioned in the Panama Papers. This information is and directly related to the person of the article. The section is called "mention in panama papers" which is neutral and does not imply any accusation. Please ask the ICIJ if you disagree with their publication.

Recent edits show an effort to censor objetive and well-documented information.

See: https://panamapapers.icij.org/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aldero (talk • contribs) 18:07, 15 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please read our policy on WP:Undue weight and WP:NOTNEWS. What encyclopedic information about the subject of this article (Petro) are you trying to convey to our readers? Xenophrenic (talk) 18:27, 15 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not seeing the relevance. According to the article you linked, there was an investigation, unrelated to the Panama Papers, in which no wrongdoing was found. And that's all there is regarding Petro. -- Irn (talk) 18:31, 15 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see "explicity mention" in the Panama papers for Gustavo Petro. can you put a reference? Arcadio25 (talk) 11:32, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Gustavo Petro. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 17:21, 26 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Gustavo Petro. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:09, 26 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Gustavo Petro. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:21, 18 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Article is biased

[edit]

Hi contributors!

As I was reading the article I found it very useful however biased, more specifically the section "Mayor of Bogota" lists all of the good points of Petro's tenure as a Major but it only mentions once (and as part of the recall section) one of the big controversies. More specifically this is the only controversy mentioned in the article: "His sanction was allegedly caused by mismanagement and illegal decrees signed during the implementation of his waste collection system".

My suggestion to improve this issue is the next: 1. Create a controversies section 2. Deepen on the mismanagement claims plus any other claims that lead to his removal from office as a major. This problem reads as a minor issue but it was not according to many news sources.

The Spanish version of the article has slightly better structure however it also reads quite biased.

M-19

[edit]

There is no reason to list all the "human rights violations" by the M-19 group if Petro himself was not involved. Its inclusion is clearly meant to make Petro look bad. ApolloCarmb (talk) 12:11, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely. Good call on getting rid of that. -- irn (talk) 14:00, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The movement's history is necessary for context. The paragraph possibly needs NPOV balance, but it is not the solution to blank a whole refereced paragraph. --Jamez42 (talk) 16:45, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Listing "human rights violations" is not necessary for context. I am seriously thinking about taking this to Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard ApolloCarmb (talk) 16:48, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
If the sources cited in that paragraph focused on the subject of this Wikipedia article (Gustavo Petro), while discussing the movement, then a "context" argument might be plausible. But they don't. In present form it is WP:UNDUE, and in some respects appears to be a WP:COATRACK within the article. Xenophrenic (talk) 17:15, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

[edit]

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) 20:04, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Many pages referring to Colombia have inaccurate statements or with little veracity or with biased sources

[edit]

The articles on Wikipedia, both in Spanish and in English, about Gustavo Petro, Álvaro Uribe Vélez, Iván Duque, the Farc, the m19, the parapolitics and the Wikiproyecto Colombia, have abundant false, doubtful, disputed statements or with biased sources or doubtful. For example these:

(Please SEMI-PROTECT them and correct them)

Gustavo Petro

Gustavo Petro

Álvaro Uribe Vélez

Álvaro Uribe

Iván Duque Márquez

Iván Duque

FARC

FARC

M19

M19

Parapolítica

Parapolitics

Protestas en Colombia 2021

2021 Colombian Protests

In summary, and in order not to repeat what some others have already said in the respective discussion pages, in the Wikipedia pages referring to Gustavo Petro and other pages and projects cited above, the pages are significantly biased towards Alvaro Uribe's opponents, even in pages that do not deal with or have nothing to do with Alvaro Uribe (such as Gustavo Petro's), with sources carefully selected to only support such opponents, often very doubtful, unobjective or biased, with phrases such as: "These revelations opened the doors of a strong social sanction to Uribe in Colombia by a sector of public opinion, and placed him in the sights of the ICC with the more than 250 processes in the Office of the Attorney General of the Nation that exist against him, and that, for different reasons, including corruption of the national powers", " Petro revealed that Uribe's presidential campaign in 2002 had received financial support from Enilse López, known such as La Gata, later convicted of ties to the United Self-Defense Forces of Colombia, "etc., etc., etc. (I will not repeat).

Getting to the point of almost calling Uribe a "murderer", "genocidal", "terrorist", "corrupt", "paramilitary", "drug trafficker", "narco-paramilitary", BOTH ON THE PAGES IN ENGLISH AND IN SPANISH, even though sometimes not using those words, as he is presented as directly related to “human rights abuses” and he is also presented as solely responsible for the violence, corruption and deaths that occurred throughout the Colombian Armed Conflict.

Forgetting or omitting that: 1) Up to now none of the investigations that the Prosecutor's Office has made or is doing, has found any evidence that he has been personally involved and has not gone to criminal trial, except for that of these days of "manipulation of witnesses ”, which is ongoing without sentencing yet, 2) He did not have any public office or had anything to do with the Armed Conflict in the first two decades until 1981, and 3) They omit the massive human rights violations, deaths, drug trafficking, kidnappings and torture committed by guerrilla groups outside the law that, although pardoned, were admitted by such groups in the 1989 and 2016 Peace Accords.

President Ivan Duque is presented as if he were Alvaro Uribe's “puppet” and he is also held directly and personally responsible for all the human rights violations and violence that are taking place in Colombia.

Even in the pages on Alvaro Uribe it is mentioned that he has about 28 proceedings against in the Supreme Court of Justice of Colombia, taking as a source a journalistic note, but when the public database of the judicial branch of Colombia is accessed, on Consultation of processes, no such processes are observed. (In the Colombian journalistic media, false news is very frequent, towards or against all the parties involved)

More or less the same happens in the Wikipedia pages that make some reference to the 2021 PROTESTS in Colombia, very biased towards the opposition, BOTH ON THE PAGES IN ENGLISH AND IN SPANISH, where the state, the police and the army are presented as the ONLY human rights violators (when the objective reality is that more than ten policemen and military have already died in the protests, and tens of thousands of small merchants or shopkeepers have lost everything due to vandalism), echoing, or taking sources that echo, what seems to be a massive campaign of fake news and misinformation referring not only to the STRIKE but to previous times of the Armed Conflict and the presidency of Alvaro Uribe and Ivan Duque, and where many of these fake news and false videos (even from Amnesty International !!!, or Cnn or Dw, who would believe it) were actually taken in Venezuela but they are presented as if they had taken place in Colombia during the 2021 PROTESTS. This massive campaign of false news and videos and disinformation, is evidenced in serious sources such as:

This video is not of the Esmad breaking Windows during the 2021 protests, it is from Venezuela in 2017

The Fake News generated during the National Protests

The fake pictures, videos and news about the 2021 strikes

Fake News during the Strikes

Popular protest in Colombia: a war of false images on social networks or imagined reality on the streets

Ministry of Defense warns about digital terrorism because of the widespread distribution of fake news during the national protests

At least 23 fake news have been detected during the protests

Fake News in Colombia

Victor Muñoz DAPRE’s Director, denies decree ordering state of emergency

These iconic buildings in the world were not lit in support of Colombia during the protests

The explosion of unverified information circulating on the media during the protests

National Protests live: the ongoing protests on May 5th

Colombia Check independent verification site

False, Young man was not burned by Esmad in Floridablanca, Santander

Duque didn’t twit that if misinformation persists he’ll cancel Facebook

Video of Young man assaulted by the police in Floridablanca is real but he was not murdered

New video of policemen inhaling a presumed drug is not in Colombia but in Chile

The one in the picture is not the Esmad’s policeman reported for taking part in an assault

Police’s Ad offering reward for presumed vandals of the sacks of April 28th is false

Video of clashes between police and army is not of April 28th protests nor in Colombia

Colombia is not the only country to propose Tax Reform amidst the outbreak

Maria Fernanda Cabal did not say coffee is not to have breakfast or dinner but for visitors

Note that in Colombia it is very risky to take journalistic notes as a source, sometimes even from supposedly "serious" or "respectable" entities such as El Tiempo or Semana, and much less opinion notes, since, as can be seen in Colombia for more than ten years, impressive amounts of fake news have been circulating. However, those are most of the sources given for the Wikipedia pages mentioned at the beginning, even on the English Wikipedia pages.

If little of what is written in Colombia, with direct knowledge of the situation, is serious or objective, much less what is written on foreign media. Not one news magazine has been left uncriticized for this in decades. Note also that credible or objective sources are so rare and occasional in Colombia, even in the supposedly “academic” sphere, that if strict criteria are used, almost nothing could be written about Colombia!

No, I am neither an uribista nor a leftist, I am a responsible and conscientious citizen who is trapped, as you surely know, in a country where everyone’s spirits are so heated and violence has been happening for so long, that it is no exaggeration to say that "half of Colombia wants to kill and hang the other half of Colombia." And that is clearly observed in the 2021 PROTESTS, where it can be said that “everyone hates everyone”.

It is assumed that Wikipedia, AND MORE IN ENGLISH, is a serious and ENCYCLOPEDIC website, for which it has no presentation that in such articles on Petro, Uribe, Duque, guerrillas, parapolitics or the Colombia Wikiproject, in Spanish and in ENGLISH, many statements are made, risky and controversial at best, implying that Uribe and Duque or the police and the army would be "murderers", "genocidal", "terrorists", "paramilitaries", "abusers of human rights ”,“ corrupt ”,“ corruption in the branches of power ”, etc., etc., etc.

Most people do not verify the facts or if what is said is true or not, and simply believe what Wikipedia says, and more being an encyclopedia.

Please, Librarians and Wikipedia editors:

Every time on one of your pages, whether in Spanish or in English, these types of statements are sneaked in, not very truthful and that could be seen as an incitement to hatred and violence, indeed half of Colombia wants to kill the other half, there are people dying!!

It is not an exaggeration to say that when a single one of these statements creeps in, or echoes a possibly false journalistic note, at least one person dies in Colombia!

Please, I beg you:

Semi-protect all those pages referring to Colombia, have the maximum possible responsibility with the wording and all statements and sources, and please proceed to correct all those pages urgently.

Thank you. Carlosverano92 (talk) 22:44, 26 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Carlosverano92 (talk) 22:13, 26 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Gustavo Petro - The article is biased and has a number of dubious or disputed statements or unreliable sources

[edit]

I know the person who bothered to correct the original article devoted a lot of time and effort to it, but I kindly note that it still has issues.

The article has a number of dubious or disputed statements and several unreliable sources, none of them scholar or academic. ENCYCLOPEDIC articles must meet a minimum of requirements as well as their sources.

Here the detail:

(SEMI-PROTECT page, correct it)

1) A part of the article is a translation of the one in spanish, or based on it, with somewhat similarly unreliable sources or biased statements, generally in favor of the subject. It is important to say that the article in spanish at Gustavo Petro with discussion at Talk:Gustavo Petro has been discussed to favor a certain public image for the subject, or part of it even written by himself under a presumed anonymous account, which, if proven, would violate Wikipedia’s policies and rules.

2) In summary, the article in English at Gustavo Petro, besides biased in favor of the subject and against former president Uribe, uses sources that limit themselves to repeating, quoting or misquoting other secondary sources, most of them in turn doing exactly that or merely echoing rumors, political campaigns or advertising, with almost none of them based on serious journalistic work with real proof nor performing a verification, particularly in the sections Lead, “early life”, “m19 militancy”, “education” and “early political career”.

3) The Lead section and the sections “early life”, “m19 militancy”, “education” and “early political career”, give very few sources for each statement, typically none or just one, perhaps two each, all of them either foreign newsmagazines that lack first-hand knowledge on Colombia, or local sources that are clearly praising the subject and are his sympathizers, like:

a) RCN, which is known as opposition media that praises Petro against the government, except “La Silla Vacía”, which is more or less reliable.

b) Bloomberg’s source, though “Bloomberg”, lacks direct knowledge of anything colombian, limiting itself to compiling or repeating unverified third party versions.

c) Semana’s source ( Gustavo Petro progressist does not do any kind of first-hand verification or research, limiting itself to repeating what others say, so do the Rosario University source Profile of the new mayor, whose link is now dead (Petro never studied at the Rosario University), and Moloka’s source ( Gustavo Petro’s Resume ), which is but the Resume submitted by the own subject when he ran for mayor of Bogota.

d) The source City Mayors – Mayors of the Month is a foreign one, lacking first-hand knowledge (or verification) on Colombia, compiling secondary sources without citing them, in a tone clearly biased towards the subject, praising him, favoring left-wings mayors as “the best” or “greener”, calling his recall a “sack” by the Inspector General, and Colombia’s democratically-elected government “undemocratic” simply because it is not left-wing and because it is pro-US.

e) Those sections “lead”, “early life”, “m19 militancy”, “education” and “early political career”, have no notary sources or academic or reliable source of such statements. The sources cited for those sections in the article in spanish are even worse: newspapers or websites of doubtful reputation, or known in Colombia for fake news or paid political advertising by many different political parties opposing each other; even El Espectador does not have a lot of reputation or credibility.

4) Those unreliable sources claim he has a variety of Masters’ and PhD degrees, but in fact, as this source shows Petro’s fake titles, Petro was alleged (and partially shown) not to have at least one or two of those degrees. The subject himself replied here Petro answers reservations about his academic degrees with his PARTIAL grade certificates, until a CERTAIN DATE, not until the end date, or certificates saying that he studied and passed the subjects but say nothing about the thesis work nor dissertation nor graduation. The subject claimed “that was everything showing his studies”, failing to show any DEGREE DIPLOMA that effectively shows he indeed graduated, including Master’s or PhD’s Diplomas in Economics, which leaves only his word, political advertising and rumors about his Master’s and PhD’s. In that last article, written by himself, the subject admitted to not having finished his PhD as well as not having graduated as Master’s in Economics from the Pontifical Xaverian University. He even admits not knowing about or not caring about Econometrics, a key part of today’s scientific Economics. At the end of the article, he himself admits to having started those studies and to not having finished them.

5) The Lead section says “Petro served as a senator as a member of the Alternative Democratic Pole party following the 2006 legislative elections with the second largest vote in the country”, using a source which is deleted on Wikinoticias, and the article in spanish claims it was the third largest vote, but actually Gustavo Petro was just FIFTH, as shown in Senadores Electos 2006 Colombia and Conformation of the Senate of the Republic.

6) In the sections “Early Life” and “m19 militancy”, the source Colombia Politics is an unreliable one, widely known as an opposition non-government organization that criticizes Alvaro Uribe in favor of his opponents (like the subject Gustavo Petro), with no direct or first-hand knowledge of the situation in Colombia, with biased or unfounded statements, which, on their webpage, show tendentious or belligerent tone about the 2021 Colombian protests, calling the police and the army, basically, “violent” “murderers”. [http://www.colombia-politics.com/aboutus/ Colombia Politics – About As)

7) Most of the sources used are sympathetic or biased towards the subject (Gustavo Petro), except a few things like Bogotá’s waste collection scandal or the recall, there are few sources critical to the subject.

8) Sympathetic towards the subject, the article makes no mention of the over 78 trials and judiciary processes where he has been denounced or sued (including criminal, supreme court, council of state, civil, human rights, etc.), which can be seen on the public database of Colombia’s Judiciary Branch at Historical Query of Trials and Processes – Colombia’s Judiciary Branch, writing “Gustavo Petro Urrego” in the name field, choosing “Todos los procesos” and leaving the other fields blank. There it can be seen that most of those trials have happened recently or are ongoing right now (much later than his m19 militancy) and are related to presumed corruption, damages caused by his repeated incitements to violent protests and strikes, calumny & libel & false accusations, his role or presumed incompetence as mayor of Bogota, the damages of his waste collection scandal, etc., etc., etc.

9) The section “Opposition to the Uribe government” says: “During a two-hour speech he [Petro] revealed a variety of documents demonstrating the relationship between members of the Colombian military, the current political leadership, narcotraffickers and paramilitary groups. Petro also criticized the actions of Álvaro Uribe as Governor of Antioquia Department during the CONVIVIR years, and presented an old photograph of Álvaro Uribe's brother, Santiago, alongside Colombian drug trafficker Fabio Ochoa Vázquez”. Such statements are INACCURATE and TENDENTIOUS: Petro intended to directly blame Uribe for everything, but he could never show a direct nor personal involvement of president Uribe (“the current political leadership”) with narcotrafficking or paramilitary groups or the Convivir, only involvement of other politicians (some even in opposition to Uribe), or that of his brother, never Uribe himself.

10) This is supported by A) Uribe didn’t undergo any impeachment process for these allegations, B) Colombia’s Nations’s General Attorney Office (which by law is quite independent from the Executive) investigated all those claims and evidence, during and after Uribe’s tenure, and shelved the matters, finding no merit to go to a criminal trial, as can be seen in the public databases of the General Attorney Office and the Judiciary Branch at Query of Complaints and Ex Officio Reports – Nation’s General Attorney Office and Historical query of trials and processes – Colombia’s Judiciary Branch. The quoted sentences need to be reworded and the word “demonstrating” has to be changed for “alleging”.

11) As these sources Petro has to rectify accusations against Uribe and Petro must retract say, Uribe filed a tutelary action against Petro, and won, for violation of the rights to honor and good name, dignity and presumption of innocence, with the Third Criminal Court of the Circuit dismissing all the “evidence” presented by Petro during the two-hour speech, and ordering Petro to rectify all his accusations within 48 hours, and also ordering: “en futuras entrevistas, o en comentarios que realice a través de redes sociales se abstenga de usar afirmaciones categóricas de comportamientos delictivos en contra del accionante " (that translates as “in future interviews, o social network comments, to abstain from making categorical statements about criminal behavior against the plaintiff”)

12) "Senator Petro alleged that the AUC financially contributed to the presidential campaign of Álvaro Uribe in 2002. Uribe refuted these statements by Petro but, during his presidential reelection campaign in 2006, admitted to having received financial support from Enilse López": the article’s subject (Gustavo Petro) stated that, but the wording is wrong, INACCURATE and TENDENTIOUS, since it implies that Uribe himself received the money for his own benefit, and:

a) As the article’s only source for this statement Gata encerrada ) stated, it was his CAMPAIGN who received a DONATION, and political campaigns have LEGAL STATUS (as a LEGAL ENTITY) separate from those of the candidates as private, natural citizens, just like a company is legally different and separate from each of its owners throughout the world. The source also states that there was no BAD FAITH implied, it was a common donation for a political campaign, like any other, and neither La Gata nor president Uribe demanded anything in return for giving or receiving the money.

b) In principle, there is no legal issue with campaigns receiving donations from questioned persons, since all Constitutions in the world guarantee PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE until proven guilty, and no investigation or prosecution had yet been done against La Gata in 2002. President Uribe never made any attempt to interfere or influence the investigations the Prosecutor’s Office was doing against La Gata and such office is by law quite independent from the Executive branch.

c) The multiple investigations by the Nation’s General Attorney Office to Uribe when president and after leaving office, found no proof that the money was ever something more than a usual, simple donation to a political campaign. THE ARTICLE HAS TO CLARIFY THAT, since it is, on the contrary, implying that Uribe himself received money from a drug dealer and paramilitary, in BAD FAITH and for personal benefit, in exchange for favors. Historical trial query – Colombia’s Judicial Branch ; Query of Criminal Complaints and Reports – Colombia’s Nation’s General Attorney Office ).

13) Contrary to Petro’s accusations, it was president Uribe who authored the Ley de Justicia y Paz in 2005 bringing paramilitary groups to justice and jail ( Ley de Justicia y Paz ), who asked for the capture of the remaining paramilitary groups ( Uribe demands capture of remaining paramilitaries, Uribe demands capture of remaining paramilitaries ), and who created a new Search Block to capture them ( Nine ex-paramilitaries captured.

14) This article is so sympathetic towards the subject (Gustavo Petro) that it doesn’t mention the different accusations of murder, assassination and kidnapping that were made against the subject during his m19 militancy (it only mentions rebellion, conspiracy and carrying of arms), though pardoned in the 1989 and 2016 Peace Agreements, neither does it mention anything of his role in the planning of Palace of Justice Siege as one of the foremost leaders of m19, for which he was being investigated by the General Attorney Office at the moment of the 1989 Peace Accord, as can be seen at Query of Complaints and Ex Officio Reports – Nation’s General Attorney Office. “Pardoned” does not mean those didn’t happen, only that they were not punished.

15) The article does not mention either the repeated, irresponsible, incendiary and often unfounded accusations the subject (Gustavo Petro) has been making for years towards traditional politicians almost indiscriminately, claiming to have “proofs”, as a political and publicitary strategy to gain sympathies and followers, as seen not only in his:

a) (dismissed) attacks to president Uribe, but also in:

b) accusing the prosecution of paramilitary infiltration when he learned that he was being investigated for trying to infiltrate it ( Fiscal dice que el infiltrado es Petro ),

c) as seen in inciting protests in Bogotá when he was recalled claiming a COUP D’ETAT ( Petro, Coup, Protests ),

d) as seen in him pressing the Prosecutor’s office to prosecute those who recalled him in retaliation ( Petro, Basuras ),

e) as seen in repeated claims to have been threatened to death by presumptly extinct paramilitary group AGUILAS NEGRAS ( [1], Petro’s claims before CIDH ), who have been considered by the Colombian Authorities to be extinct and rather replaced by low-level criminal groups, as shown in ( Neoparamilitarism?, Petro and Cepeda denounce threats, Planflets named after Black Eagles ).

f) as seen in claiming that the two officers asked their IDs more or less near his mother’s house ( Militarymen were performing verification activities: army ) were actually threatening his family or himself to death,

g) as seen in his claims during the 2010 presidential campaign that his aim was to “remove organized crime from power”, calling president Uribe “organized crime”, despite Petro himself being seen as a “murderer” by a segment of the population and despite the Third Court of the Circuit in 2007 ordering him to abstain from public criminal accusations against president Uribe, in Petro has to rectify accusations against Uribe and Petro must retract,

h) or as seen in his inciting of the 2021, and 2019-2020 massive street riots in Colombia ( What happens in the Protests is Petro’s responsibility, Petro calls Football fans to be part of the protests ),

i) or as seen in his repeated but unproven claims that Ivan Duque won the 2018 presidential elections by means of FRAUD ( Petro denies Ivan Duque as president,

j) or in his claims that he is going to criminally report his supporter, mayor of Bogota Claudia Lopez ( Petro threatens to file criminal trial against Claudia Lopez ),

k) or as seen in his claims, again, of COUP D’ETAT when the National Electoral Council, following the law, revoked the legal status of his political movement Colombia Humana because of extremely low vote in the 2018 Legislative Elections ( CNE denies legal status to Colombia Humana ), which does not prevent him from running for president in 2022…

(my God that guy Petro sounds like Trump!) (everything that does not favor him is a coup d’etat or a conspiracy)

16) The two officers Petro claimed were “spying on him” or “trying to kill his family”, were not captured nor detained, only asked their IDs, neither were they too close to his family’s home, and the army officially answered that they were investigating another, unrelated matter of intelligence (verification), as the source ( Militarymen were performing verification activities: army ) says.

17) Most of those “death threats” Petro talks about, have been investigated by the Nation’s General Attorney Office (which is quite independent from the Executive branch), so far having found no proof or evidence, or not being directly targeted at Petro, and hence shelving them and not going to criminal trial, despite death threats being a criminal offense in Colombia, as can be seen both in the public databases of the General Attorney Office and the Judiciary Branch at Query of Complaints and Ex Officio Reports – Nation’s General Attorney Office and Historical query of trials and processes – Colombia’s Judiciary Branch.

18) Furthermore, the BLACK EAGLES are considered by the Colombian Authorities to be extinct by the dates Petro claimed to have been threatened, and rather replaced by low-level criminal groups, as shown in ( Neoparamilitarism?, Petro and Cepeda denounce threats, Planflets named after Black Eagles ).

19) When asked about Petro’s death threats, Colonel Jimmy Perez Baena, commander in charge of the police, answered that such AGUILAS NEGRAS no longer exist, that it is other criminal bands who have taken their name, devoted to drug trafficking and in coalition with remnants of FARC, and that a number of people had been captured and made available to the Prosecution, engaged in selective homicides, who were found weapons, ammunition and pamphlets alluding to both social cleansing groups and the FARC (another guerrilla group supposed to be sympathetic to Petro), detracting from the possibility that the colombian right-wing is somehow involved in the threats, as shown in ( Neoparamilitarism?, Petro and Cepeda denounce threats, Planflets named after Black Eagles ).

20) “A lawsuit has been filed by citizens against Duque alleging bribery and fraud. The News chain Wradio made public the law suit July 11, which was presented to the CNE (Consejo Nacional Electoral, National Electoral Council, by its acronym in Spanish).[36] The state of the law suit will be defined by the Magistrado Alberto Yepes”, with the source Elections sued, but it was not presented to the CNE but to the Consejo de Estado, and the wording is INACCURATE and TENDENTIOUS: that source and the lawsuit do not mention “bribery” nor “fraud”, instead focusing on the fact that the Consejo Nacional Electoral did not allow the inscription of the party “Integración Nacionalista Radical Internacional”, and also on an alleged double-militancy incurred in by elected Vice-president Martha Lucia Ramirez.

21) Based on those allegations, that lawsuit took place and the highest instance, the Consejo de Estado, sentenced in favor of current president Ivan Duque Marquez and current Vice-president Martha Lucia Ramirez, as can be seen in: ( Pretensions rejected, double militancy denied ), where Petro and the citizens demanded “Que mediante sentencia sea declarada la nulidad del acto de elección popular efectuado el 17 de junio de 2018, en desarrollo de la segunda vuelta de la elección presidencial de nuestro país”, “En consecuencia, que se disponga la cancelación de las credenciales de Presidente y Vicepresidente que se hubiesen otorgado a los Doctores Iván Duque Márquez y Martha Lucía Ramírez Blanco” (“that by means of a sentence nullity of the act of popular election performed on June 17th, 2018, during the run-off of the presidential elections, be declared”, “Consequently, order the cancellation of the credentials of President and Vice President that had been granted to Doctors Iván Duque Márquez and Martha Lucía Ramírez Blanco”), where the sentence says: “Deniéganse las pretensiones de la demanda de conformidad con lo expuesto en la parte motiva de esta providencia” (“The pretensions of the lawsuit are denied according to what is stated in the motive part of this ruling”).

Please, proceed to correct all those above-mentioned 21 points.

The correction is urgent, critical and necessary, given the heated environment in Colombia right now, where hatred floods everything and where Wikipedia is taken as the referent to claim former president Uribe is “a murderer” and “a drug dealer”, which is the apparent implication of the article as it is right now.

Thank you, critic1234567 Critic1234567 (talk) 02:52, 28 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You can correct these yourself, if you're willing 

Piotr (Venezuela) (talk) 15:32, 22 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

[edit]

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) 04:09, 17 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Edit warring, Requests for page protection

[edit]

As you can see the article has been in a edit warring in the last few days, it seems necessary to consider protecting the page for at least the period of the presidential elections to prevent this from happening and also to avoid vandalism. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Frijolito1x (talk • contribs) 16:54, 28 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I second this request. Repeated vandalism continues. 2603:8001:A001:274B:D4EA:38EC:F182:7B2B (talk) 19:53, 8 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Academic degrees

[edit]

Would it be warranted to add this page as a source, which claims a portion of Petro's claimed academic history is not true? 47.19.150.58 (talk) 13:24, 21 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

[edit]

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) 20:39, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"Of italian origin"

[edit]

This guy is like 1/8 italian, he's more colombian than anything else. Sure it's fair to mention his distant ancestry but to have it right after his name is a bit too much. 190.77.215.236 (talk) 07:06, 16 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"...the first left-wing president in the recent history of Colombia."

[edit]

What does "recent" even means? That's subjective, and the hyperlink in said word just goes to "history of Colombia". 2800:200:ED80:1A0:2127:9E21:7FF:D2 (talk) 23:02, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Gustavo_Petro&oldid=1256728141"