Talk:Hugo Chávez

Why the "sic" in the spanish word "llanero"? The spelling is correct... - Joaquin89uy (talk) 21:30, 11 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

User:Duponiuex continues to revert my edits without explanations so here I am to discuss.

My edits were an attempt to begin resolving the 2014 WP:AL notice on the Policy Overview section and the unresolved WP:CON and WP:NPOV conversations from the talk page from 2015[1] and 2017[2][3], and also the 2018 WP:NPOV discussion[4].

For example: 1) "Chávez created the Bolivarian Missions, aimed at providing public services to improve economic, cultural, and social conditions, using these populist policies in order to maintain political power"

"in order to maintain political power" is WP:POVPUSH and speculation about intentions that is not supported by sources.

2) "Chávez's populist policies eventually led to a severe socioeconomic crisis in Venezuela." is only sourced to one article by The Chosun Ilbo, which is identified on its Wiki page as a Korean "Right-wing Conservative" paper. Hardly a WP:RS on a topic about left-wing political figures in Venezuela.

3) "The Chávez administration then used such oil prices on his populist policies to gain the approval of voters." is another example of speculating about intent of actions and is again not WP:NPOV.

4) "Economists say that the Venezuelan government's overspending" gives no citations to which economists and "overspending" is again non-WP:NPOV language.

My edits were marked as vandalism and reverted multiple times. It seems like WP:IDONTLIKETHEM to me but I'm open to discussion. Edittttor (talk) 13:34, 15 October 2022 (UTC)Reply

You don't get to decide which parts of the information in source should be left out of article to make Chavez look good. All of this is properly sourced to reliable news sites.--Duponiuex (talk) 00:52, 16 October 2022 (UTC)Reply

Accusing other editors of just trying to make controversial figures look good is against one of the fundamental principals of Wikipedia (see WP:GOODFAITH).

My edits are not about making someone look good, they're about building an article that has a neutral point of view (see WP:NPOV) and that doesn't rely on cherrypicking from sources (see WP:CHERRYPICKING).

Please avoid status quo stonewalling (see WP:STONEWALLING) by providing a clear, substantive explanation of your objection to the changes that were made. Edittttor (talk) 12:50, 16 October 2022 (UTC)Reply

I looked up one of the sources, the one for "Chávez's populist policies eventually led to a severe socioeconomic crisis in Venezuela." This is an article in a South Korean newspaper, The Chosun Ilbo. The use of this source is obvious evidence of cherry-picking. The editor looked for a source that supported his or her view. Obviously anyone reseaching Venezuela is unlikely to go to a South Korean newspaper for information unless they happen to live there. Furthermore, the opinions of newspaper reporters are not reliable sources for facts. TFD (talk) 02:33, 16 October 2022 (UTC)Reply

Although I reverted reverted the new editor who had deleted what s/he described as a WP:QUOTEFARM, I do think the quotes are a bit excessive in length and can be trimmed. --David Tornheim (talk) 23:47, 18 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

I agree that the deletion was overbroad and likewise agree that this section is too long. A step-by-step approach to revising is probably better, focusing on the block quotes. JArthur1984 (talk) 23:53, 18 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

Indeed. Step-by-step is better. --David Tornheim (talk) 23:54, 18 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

@David Tornheim and JArthur1984: I agree as well. I may make some edits to summarize what is being said in each quote. If you have any concerns, you can bring link the edit here and we can discuss. WMrapids (talk) 02:51, 19 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

Here is a list of my edits and their edit summaries:

1. [5] - Removing two quotes; the first was talking about the Caracazo events (which I shortened and provided context in the body) and the second was a very broad statement.
2. [6] - Summarized third quote
3. [7] - Removing coffee quote. Consolidating into "Criticism of capitalism and neoliberalism" and "Marxism and socialism" subsections. Soviet Union quotes consolidated. Tax reform and Mission Robinson quotes removed. Gandhi and Nehru quote moved to "Other influences" section.

Apologies for not spreading out the last edit, but a lot of it had to do with the organization of sections and seemed more appropriate. If you have any concerns, be sure to let me know!--WMrapids (talk) 04:44, 19 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

One of the sections I created at the Talk part was deleted. Why? Vintaquar (talk) 03:22, 4 March 2024 (UTC)Reply

Most likely, it got archived automatically. Allan Nonymous (talk) 14:50, 16 April 2024 (UTC)Reply