This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Crisis in Venezuela article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives:
Index,
1,
2Auto-archiving period: 30 days
![]() |
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | The contents of the Venezuelan economic crisis of 2016 page were merged into Crisis in Venezuela on 2017. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see its history; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page. |
I've taken cursory looks at this article and contributed a small section on the effects of the crisis on the oil regions, that seems to have been appreciated. It seems to me the article is not quite addressing, or emphasizing, the main origins of the crisis which is the two problems of (1) the collapse of oil prices and (2) the failures of the Chavez/Maduro governments (and associated corruption of PDVSA) to maintain oil production. (Perhaps with corruption directed at siphoning oil revenue??? I know nothing of that.) If it were me, I would attempt to reorganize this article around these main points. The article does a good job of describing all the effects of the collapse of oil revenue - the government has little money to spend for its promised social programs, but not how and why that revenue disappeared. For example, a figure showing the decline in oil prices with corresponding crisis points would be interesting.
(As an aside, I noted the arguments regarding "Socialism" above. I was about to complain about the quote and citation that has been removed from the article, with the observation that citations from the U.S. Department of State can no longer be considered NPOV. A sad state of affairs. The situation in Venezuela has not much to do with socialism and quite a lot to do with oil! (and a lot of economic mismanagement, to be sure) Socialist Norway is one of the wealthiest countries with its oil.) My 2 cents. Bdushaw ( talk) 01:12, 6 June 2019 (UTC)
Expropriations, price fixing, subsidies, expansion of social welfare, just to mention some, can all be considered socialist policies. That being said, it would be completely appropriate to include some background, if I'm not mistaken this has been proposed before to talk about the history of Petróleos de Venezuela. Even though it has hired more workers over the year, its production at first stayed the same, and Rafael Ramírez's direction deserves analysis. -- Jamez42 ( talk) 19:02, 6 June 2019 (UTC)
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) 04:34, 13 November 2020 (UTC)
This is not so called Bolivarian Revolution. It should be a constitutional and political crisis under United Socialist Party of Venezuela dictatorship under Hugo Chavez and Nicolas Maduro. Marxistfounder ( talk) 06:07, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
Are Tasnim News Agency and Orinico Tribune reliable sources for this article? BobFromBrockley ( talk) 11:44, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
User:NoonIcarus deleted this material from Glenn Greenwald's piece in The Intercept on the grounds that it violates WP:OPINION. (I should point out that this editor first deleted it without explanation, while adding other material at the same time.) I would argue the opposite: this policy pertains more to opinions of editors and not necessarily those published in reliable sources, especially once proper attribution is applied. As such, the material is properly attributed to Greenwald and published in a reliable source. In addition, given the controversial nature of this particular event, the early 2019 humanitarian aid package sent by the US per the Trump Administration, the point of view is perhaps WP:DUE given the Administration was deliberately using the aid package to undermine the current Venezuelan government, as reported in other reliable sources ( here and here) and even from the agency that provided the relief ( USAID) - this unbelievably is not even mentioned in the article. Based on this, and what is stated in WP:OPINION: “Each POV should be clearly labeled and described, so readers know: Who advocates the point of view; What their arguments are (supporting evidence, reasoning, etc.)”, I believe the Greenwald material should be restored and perhaps augmented with these sources and others as this point of view is completely omitted from this section.-- C.J. Griffin ( talk) 15:52, 5 November 2022 (UTC)
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Venezuelan crisis (disambiguation) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. — RMCD bot 03:34, 28 June 2023 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Crisis in Venezuela article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives:
Index,
1,
2Auto-archiving period: 30 days
![]() |
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | The contents of the Venezuelan economic crisis of 2016 page were merged into Crisis in Venezuela on 2017. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see its history; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page. |
I've taken cursory looks at this article and contributed a small section on the effects of the crisis on the oil regions, that seems to have been appreciated. It seems to me the article is not quite addressing, or emphasizing, the main origins of the crisis which is the two problems of (1) the collapse of oil prices and (2) the failures of the Chavez/Maduro governments (and associated corruption of PDVSA) to maintain oil production. (Perhaps with corruption directed at siphoning oil revenue??? I know nothing of that.) If it were me, I would attempt to reorganize this article around these main points. The article does a good job of describing all the effects of the collapse of oil revenue - the government has little money to spend for its promised social programs, but not how and why that revenue disappeared. For example, a figure showing the decline in oil prices with corresponding crisis points would be interesting.
(As an aside, I noted the arguments regarding "Socialism" above. I was about to complain about the quote and citation that has been removed from the article, with the observation that citations from the U.S. Department of State can no longer be considered NPOV. A sad state of affairs. The situation in Venezuela has not much to do with socialism and quite a lot to do with oil! (and a lot of economic mismanagement, to be sure) Socialist Norway is one of the wealthiest countries with its oil.) My 2 cents. Bdushaw ( talk) 01:12, 6 June 2019 (UTC)
Expropriations, price fixing, subsidies, expansion of social welfare, just to mention some, can all be considered socialist policies. That being said, it would be completely appropriate to include some background, if I'm not mistaken this has been proposed before to talk about the history of Petróleos de Venezuela. Even though it has hired more workers over the year, its production at first stayed the same, and Rafael Ramírez's direction deserves analysis. -- Jamez42 ( talk) 19:02, 6 June 2019 (UTC)
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) 04:34, 13 November 2020 (UTC)
This is not so called Bolivarian Revolution. It should be a constitutional and political crisis under United Socialist Party of Venezuela dictatorship under Hugo Chavez and Nicolas Maduro. Marxistfounder ( talk) 06:07, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
Are Tasnim News Agency and Orinico Tribune reliable sources for this article? BobFromBrockley ( talk) 11:44, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
User:NoonIcarus deleted this material from Glenn Greenwald's piece in The Intercept on the grounds that it violates WP:OPINION. (I should point out that this editor first deleted it without explanation, while adding other material at the same time.) I would argue the opposite: this policy pertains more to opinions of editors and not necessarily those published in reliable sources, especially once proper attribution is applied. As such, the material is properly attributed to Greenwald and published in a reliable source. In addition, given the controversial nature of this particular event, the early 2019 humanitarian aid package sent by the US per the Trump Administration, the point of view is perhaps WP:DUE given the Administration was deliberately using the aid package to undermine the current Venezuelan government, as reported in other reliable sources ( here and here) and even from the agency that provided the relief ( USAID) - this unbelievably is not even mentioned in the article. Based on this, and what is stated in WP:OPINION: “Each POV should be clearly labeled and described, so readers know: Who advocates the point of view; What their arguments are (supporting evidence, reasoning, etc.)”, I believe the Greenwald material should be restored and perhaps augmented with these sources and others as this point of view is completely omitted from this section.-- C.J. Griffin ( talk) 15:52, 5 November 2022 (UTC)
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Venezuelan crisis (disambiguation) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. — RMCD bot 03:34, 28 June 2023 (UTC)