Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 19:14, 21 January 2024

Venezuela Unassessed Mid‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Venezuela, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Venezuela on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.VenezuelaWikipedia:WikiProject VenezuelaTemplate:WikiProject VenezuelaVenezuela ??? This article has not yet received a rating on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information.

Tags

I was hoping to leave this message after trying to improve the issues. However, since these were reverted, on the "bright side" the concerns are still present, which are mostly about neutrality and original research:

• Starting with the term, "guarimba" is a colloquial term for a street barricade. This is already point out in previous content such as the Protests against Nicolás Maduro article, so I don't know why it is now as a "urban guerrilla warfare tactic" or as an unique form of protest.
• The article fails to mention how the term has become pejorative and has been used to criminalize demonstrations, giving them a violent connotation. This has material for an excellent analysis and explanation, but it states content in an editorial voice that should normally be attributed and cites primary sources, such as the Constitution and a sentence of the Supreme Tribunal directly
• The article does not mention any background information. Apparently Venezuelan demonstrators only started building barricades has a protests method because Roberto Alonso suggested them to. There were already precedents such as in the late 80s, and terms such as tirapiedras or encapuchados go back to generations. Even Chávez' supporters started guarimbas to protest his detention during the 2002 coup. Anyone familiar with Venezuelan modern history will tell how far this is from the truth, or point out how there are other equivalents in the region (see Peron's descamisados, for instance).
• Last but not least, as with other disputed edits, the content largely depends on English language academic papers, instead to mainstream media outlets, which suggests that the majority points of view are currently not being reflected.

This should cover the problems overall. This is the last version where I tried to solve the problems: . Regards, NoonIcarus (talk) 00:05, 18 November 2023 (UTC)

@WMrapids: Do you have any thoughts on these? Regards, --NoonIcarus (talk) 12:43, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

@WMrapids: You have yet to respond to these mentioned issues. Besides the ones above, I'm also concerned about the overreliance on a Miami New Times article from 2007, a local source that is used 11 times and is mostly used to reference content about Robert Alonso. As with other articles, this is problematic per WP:WEIGHT and WP:AGEMATTERS: instead of reflecting a mainstream point of view, we're amplifying one from an article from 16 years ago, which is more troublesome considering the history of promotional edits by Robert Alonso (simply look up the tantrum he threw after his article was deleted). The article is giving more weight and credit to Alonso than it should, even including topics totally unrelated to the protests, such as the Daktari Ranch affair. This is an article about the guarimbas, not about him.

This is even without considering the neutrality issues, including that you're changing the sentence The first guarimbas started in late February 2004, blocked Caracas neighborhoods, after the National Electoral Council announced that the signatures presented to request the 2004 presidential recall referendum had to be examined a second time., closer to original source, to During protests following allegations of fraudulent signature collections by the National Electoral Council. for some reason, or the videos that you're now including from government outlets that need independent verification for facts. --NoonIcarus (talk) 19:32, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Ah, almost forgot: you're insisting on using guarimbas as an adjective instead of a noun. That is just odd and bizarre, and the majority of sources leave clear that a guarimba is a barricade, while guarimberos is the people that partake in them or the pejorative term for demonstrators. Maybe you could look further into the PROVEA sources you have already used? It's a good start. Best wishes, --NoonIcarus (talk) 19:36, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

@WMrapids: Hello? --NoonIcarus (talk) 10:11, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

1. We seemed to have addressed this first concern.
2. Find a source to describe the "pejorative" claims you raised.
3. Find history and provide it, but that does not mean that you need to remove what current sources state. The more recent guarimba protests/tactics are directly descended from Alonso. Just because a Miami New Times in 2007 provided relevant information on guarimbas at that time does not mean that it is irrelevant; please remember that WP:AGEMATTERS revolves around "in scientific and academic fields", so you seem to be grasping at straws to exclude this information somehow. The Daktari Ranch affair is relevant since the sources directly relate the guarimba protests of 2004 to this incident.
4. @Ultranuevo: has now questioned your removal of peer-reviewed academic sources on Talk:Lima Consensus as well. Please stop.
5. "ideos that you're now including from government outlets that need independent verification for facts". This is false. The source that provided this is an independent TV channel. Whether it has a bias or not is unrelated to its applicability for this article.
6. I never suggested "using guarimbas as an adjective instead of a noun".

WMrapids (talk) 14:37, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

@WMrapids: Since I didn't number my comment, it's confusing trying to follow the response, so I'll respond as a whole just like I did originally. I just finished doing a major translating from the Spanish version based on reports from the International Fact-Finding Mission on Venezuela, the Organization of American States and human rights NGO, including PROVEA, which you have cited before. All of the new information should show what I've explained, particularly about "guarimbero" as a pejorative term.

You seem to be missing the point about that age matters. I'm pointing out that this is a source from 2007, way before the 2014 and 2017 protests happened, so it's only natural that that definition is outdated. I can't stress enough too that the overreliance on a local source is problematic, when there are a lot others with better quality. "Guarimba" is currently used as an adjective several times throughout the article, including as "guarimba protests" and "guarimba tactic", which should be fixed, and your uploads are from community television channels, which means they receive government funding (and don't really have editorial independence, either). While we're at it, I don't know what you mean with the "removal of peer-reviewed academic sources" at Lima Consensus. I can only recall inline tagging, so it's better that you provide diffs in this case. I hope all of this answers the questions. --NoonIcarus (talk) 23:30, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

I'm simply baffled by the amount of content removed , including with rationale such as OAS report has a conflict of interest as it is paneled by Irwin Cotler, an attorney of Leopoldo López. The last sources provided were supposed to be from the highest quality that can be found about the civil unrest in the country. All of the uses of the term by security forces were intended to back up the arguments that I have made here ad nauseam, just like Chávez was first cited about the 2009 protests. --NoonIcarus (talk) 06:32, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

I'll explain each edit:

1. This is not an adjective, it is denoting being a member of a group based on their method of action. Think of a recon soldier, a race car driver, etc.
2. These actions are responses from the government. The opinions are also responses from the public and other groups. Placing them in a consolidated section provides more balance.
3. Did not find this in the sources provided and it appeared to be original research. If you could provide specific quotes and page numbers, that would clear things up. That still does not take away from it possibly being undue.
4. The OAS is an anti-socialist organization and it deliberately chose a lawyer for an opposition leader to lead this investigation. Again, not only is this a possible conflict of interest, it is undue.
5. See above.
6. Blatantly POV and not necessary. We already have information about reported torture, etc. regarding the Venezuelan government.

Let me know if you have any other concerns so we can balance this out. WMrapids (talk) 19:14, 21 January 2024 (UTC)

Gara

In this edit summary, why is the Gara article not considered an opinion piece? It is clearly labeled under the Analysis category. NoonIcarus (talk) 12:32, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

No one thinks of the Kale borroka when talking about the guarimba. The only two articles, out of twenty-six, that mention this are the 2004 BBC article and said Gara opinion piece. --NoonIcarus (talk) 14:26, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

Analysis is not opinion. WMrapids (talk) 16:28, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

If the Analysis category doesn't hint at this, the biased language should:

• The "guarimbas", much more than a bourgeois "kale borroka".
• There is no more symbolic territory for the Creole right wing than the famous Plaza Altamira
• The also known as Plaza Francia has been a bastion of reactionary groups.
• It was a meeting place for military coup plotters, a nucleus of support for the bosses' strikes, and today, a meeting place for a handful of well-off youngsters -most of them- who play at being rebels by practicing the so-called "guarimba", the Creole "kale borroka".
• It is surprising the instrumentalization made by the right wing of the more than 40 dead, treating them as if they were "their" dead, taking into account that a great majority of them were from the Chavista side.
• The cruelty of the message is breathtaking, as other "unforgettable" slogans coined by the bourgeoisie in times of Chávez's illness, such as the one that said "Long live cancer". These are interspersed with other more frivolous ones, such as those that can be seen in the posters that have been pasted on tree trunks: "I also want to travel to Europe", "I want my own urbanization (luxury neighborhood)" or "Maduro, I don't even have enough money to get my tits done".
• On the one hand, we have the aforementioned well-to-do children, who play counterrevolution with the complacency of the international media latifundia, which magically turns them into popular heroes against a repressive regime.
• It is also surprising the patience with which the popular sectors are enduring the aggressions.

--NoonIcarus (talk) 11:36, 12 December 2023 (UTC)

Bias, which is something you are personally interpreting, does not mean the source is unreliable. However per WP:NEWSORG, I will agree with you that news media analyses and information from editorial boards are not appropriate for bold claims. Wanted to make sure that there was a policy supporting your removal based on "analysis" and found it. We can keep it out. WMrapids (talk) 21:03, 12 December 2023 (UTC)

Take a look at WP:RSOPINION. I'm saying that this cannot be used for referencing because it is an opinion piece, pointing out at the loaded language as proof, nothing else. I'm glad that we can agree on this, though. --NoonIcarus (talk) 21:12, 12 December 2023 (UTC)

Pejorative term

@WMrapids: The refs I included in the article explained why "guarimba" and "guarimbero" was a pejorative term, even going to the lengths of including the quotes in the sources, but you removed them. I will leave some examples in the talk page as reference:

• Organization of American States: anyone who participates in demonstrations or expresses disagreement is labeled a "guarimbero" or "terrorist" (pag 57) and On the other hand, the constant use of stigmatizing insults with degrading political epithets and accusations of being 'guarimberos' - a pejorative term used by government supporters to describe those who participate in opposition demonstrations - demonstrates that members of the security forces knew that the acts they were committing, viz: killings, imprisonment or other severe deprivation of physical liberty, torture, rape and other forms of sexual violence, persecution or forced disappearance, were part of the attack directed against a particular group of the civilian population
• PROVEA: The official sector developed an overwhelming campaign of rejection and demonization, calling this type of action "guarimbas" and those who supported them "terrorist guarimberos", thus becoming the new enemy to be subdued with blood and fire.
• Human Rights Observatory of the University of the Andes Public officials of the criminal justice system in Mérida, using stigmatizing and violent language, differentiated these persons and their legal proceedings to their detriment under the denomination of "guarimberos" or "guarimba cases".

I supposed that all of this should give at least a some weight to what I have been saying for months now. NoonIcarus (talk) 18:50, 21 January 2024 (UTC)

And after this I'm astonished that you just double down on your assertion: Example text. --NoonIcarus (talk) 19:12, 21 January 2024 (UTC)

@WMrapids: Also, you're asking me to discuss first when you have not responded?? WP:CANTHEARYOU much? --NoonIcarus (talk) 19:13, 21 January 2024 (UTC)

• Unassessed Venezuela articles
• Mid-importance Venezuela articles
• Venezuela articles
• Misplaced Pages controversial topics