Jump to content

Talk:Nicolás Maduro

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

One-Sidedness

[edit]

If you are going to call Maduro an "autocrat" and cite conservative think tanks as your sources (clear political bias) then provide the other side of the argument. Wikipedia is not supposed to be a defecating America Propaganda Machine. Lysentalin (talk) 19:32, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ahh yes, the ever persisting conservative political bias of wikipedia. 47.54.220.12 (talk) 02:06, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed this page is insanely biased. Looks like the CIA wrote it personally 2600:1700:B6D0:1930:7CB7:773A:BF9F:8D1D (talk) 04:29, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia has a heavy left-wing bias problem, not a right-wing one. 2605:B100:13D:5CF9:3C62:246E:4611:77AF (talk) 04:31, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"20,000 extrajudicial killings"

[edit]

Lead section includes this statement:

"According to estimations by the United Nations (UN) and Human Rights Watch, under Maduro's administration, more than 20,000 people have been subject to extrajudicial killings and seven million Venezuelans have been forced to flee the country"

This struck me as surprising, and when I reviewed the cited HRW and UN materials, these are the only relevant portions I could find in the cited material:

"Between 2016 and 2019, security forces alleged “resistance to authority” in more than 19,000 killings. Evidence showed many were extrajudicial killings." - Human Rights Watch
"Special Action Forces described by witnesses as “death squads” killed 5,287 people in 2018 and another 1,569 by mid-May of this year" - The Independent (citing the UN)

It may improve the neutrality of the article to strike the "more than 20,000" extrajudicial killings figure until a reliable source supports it. Perhaps a worthy rewrite would match the figures in the sources and/or convey the nuance described in such sources. Mihir.pethe1 (talk) 03:17, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This article is not neutral in any way at all 2600:1700:B6D0:1930:7CB7:773A:BF9F:8D1D (talk) 04:28, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

how is there not a series on this man

[edit]

how is there not an article series on this man 108.27.60.251 (talk) 19:33, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No political views section?

[edit]

In my experience, most articles for politicians mention their described politics in the opening body or in a section on Political Views. See the section on Bukele, for instance. Nayib Bukele#Political views

Is this deliberate or just an oversight? 162.222.63.62 (talk) 12:29, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You presume there are some? Sources? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:59, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm surprised and a bit confused to see you suggesting there aren't :)
Autocracy Rising by Javier Corrales PhD seems like a good place to start. Plenty of other books, that's just the first I'm familiar with.
I'd be happy to find some relevant passages and prepare a section. 162.222.63.62 (talk) 11:43, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request on July 29th 2024. Typo

[edit]

In the final paragraph of the Controversies section, there is a typo of "administration's Biden", when it should be "Biden's administration". 75.76.148.132 (talk) 01:48, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Done -Ad Orientem (talk) 01:55, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No longer president

[edit]

Why hasn't the article been updated to mention he lost, by a landslide no less!

Wikipedia moderators, why are you defending this tyrant?! 206.84.247.108 (talk) 16:33, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Because the mods don't like facts. You would think that at the very least there would be a "disputed since 2024" note or something, like is done with the Belarus president, but it's always a fight to put these facts in. 2605:B100:13D:5CF9:3C62:246E:4611:77AF (talk) 04:43, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There was a lot of discussion about this in the past, when Juan Guaido declared himself acting president. Policy says that we should follow what reliable sources say. Normally they are more concerned with who is actually running a country than their legitimacy. TFD (talk) 05:32, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed, especially about Juan Guaido. More importantly, the Venezuelan authorities have declared that he won the election: "Venezuela’s National Electoral Council (CNE) on Monday formally declared Maduro the winner of the vote." [1] It's strange how U.S. presidents think they can decide who won other countries' elections, the way they have done by force in regime change. --David Tornheim (talk) 21:51, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There is a lot of evidence of electoral fraud, and the CNE hasn't even published the tally sheets six days after the election, there is no reason to take their word at face value. 2804:29B8:5183:100C:EC56:6313:3784:10E6 (talk) 02:27, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The hell does the U.S. have to do with this, David? It’s the wider western world that don't recognize the results. Where's the disputed tag, huh? Be consistent or acknowledge the bias! 2605:B100:121:A764:3966:79F9:A262:F0D (talk) 19:56, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"defending this tyrant" this isnt an anti-authoritarian website, user, although i agree that we should add a 'disputed' note, Maduro is still unfortunately in power whether we like it or not. 108.27.60.251 (talk) 14:56, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
also just because he de facto lost an election doesnt remove him from the office, you know how fraudulent the venezuelan government can be, not everything works like it does in first world countries lol 108.27.60.251 (talk) 14:59, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]