Wikipedia:Peer review/Venezuela/archive1: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 00:34, 12 March 2007

Venezuela‎

Self-nomination. No peer review. Looking forward to comments regarding prose, organization, flow, length, comprehensiveness, neutrality, etc. Saravask 02:16, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Strongly Opposed. Until major POV issues in the Politics section are resolved:

1) How do you explain that "A New Era (UNT) together with its allied parties Project Venezuela, Justice First, and others." are "center-right"? where are the reliable references to their ideologies? How do you explain, for example, that they are allies with Movement for Socialism (Venezuela), Red Flag Party and Radical_Cause?

2) Is the word "watchdog" the best way to describe Súmate?.

3)"Historically, Venezuelan politics was dominated by the center-right Christian democratic COPEI and the center-left Social democratic Democratic Action (AD) parties". Do you mean after the fall of Marcos Pérez Jiménez? or for ever and ever?

4)"Because voting is not compulsory". Voting is compulsory in Venezuela, although no punishment is enforced and, by the way, in this regard I'm still wating for an answer to my arguments at the Talk:compulsory voting

5) "As is common elsewhere in Latin America, the National Assembly has twice voted to grant Chávez the ability rule by decree in several broadly defined areas, once in 2000 and again in 2007". Now this is just grotesque! "common elsewhere in Latin America"? where is this coming from? facts? references? or is this article trying to justify a president ruling under an enabling act? (by the way, enabling act is another article clearly aimed at trying to justify the enabling act of the current President, since it does not explain that Lusinchi's act was under an economic crisis and restricted to economic issues, Ramón José Velásquez was to rule for a brief period of one year after the destitution of Carlos Andrés Pérez and Pérez's occurred after the Caracazo, hence those enabling acts have nothing to do with the current act which was dictated under no extraordinary circumstances) (Caracas1830 00:34, 12 March 2007 (UTC))[reply]

@@ Line 3: / Line 3: @@
 *'''Strongly Opposed'''. Until major POV issues in the ''Politics'' section are resolved:
 :1) How do you explain that "[[A New Era]] (UNT) together with its allied parties [[Project Venezuela]], [[Justice First]], and others." are "center-right"? where are the reliable references to their ideologies? How do you explain, for example, that  they are allies with [[Movement for Socialism (Venezuela)]], [[Red Flag Party]] and [[Radical_Cause]]?
-::2) Is the word "watchdog" the best way to descrive Is [[Súmate]]?.
+::2) Is the word "watchdog" the best way to describe [[Súmate]]?.
 :::3)"Historically, Venezuelan politics was dominated by the center-right Christian democratic COPEI and the center-left Social democratic Democratic Action (AD) parties". Do you mean after the fall of [[Marcos Pérez Jiménez]]? or for ever and ever?
 ::::4)"Because voting is not compulsory". Voting ''is'' compulsory in Venezuela, although no punishment is enforced and, by the way, in this regard I'm still wating for an answer to my arguments at the [[Talk:compulsory voting]]
-:::::5) "As is common elsewhere in Latin America, the National Assembly has twice voted to grant Chávez the ability rule by decree in several broadly defined areas, once in 2000 and again in 2007". Now this is just grotesque! "common elsewhere in Latin America"? where is this coming from? facts? references? or is this article trying to justify a president ruling under an [[enabling act]]? (by the way, [[enabling act]] is another article clearly aimed at trying to justify the enabling act of the current President, since it does not explain that Lusinchi's act was under an economic crisis and restricted to economic issues, [[Ramón José Velásquez]] was to rule for a brief period of one year after the destitution of [[Carlos Andrés Pérez]] and Pérez's occurred after the [[Caracazo]], hence those enabling acts have nothing to do with the current act which was dictated under no extraordinary circumstances)
+:::::5) "As is common elsewhere in Latin America, the National Assembly has twice voted to grant Chávez the ability rule by decree in several broadly defined areas, once in 2000 and again in 2007". Now this is just grotesque! "common elsewhere in Latin America"? where is this coming from? facts? references? or is this article trying to justify a president ruling under an [[enabling act]]? (by the way, [[enabling act]] is another article clearly aimed at trying to justify the enabling act of the current President, since it does not explain that Lusinchi's act was under an economic crisis and restricted to economic issues, [[Ramón José Velásquez]] was to rule for a brief period of one year after the destitution of [[Carlos Andrés Pérez]] and Pérez's occurred after the [[Caracazo]], hence those enabling acts have nothing to do with the current act which was dictated under no extraordinary circumstances) ([[User:Caracas1830|Caracas1830]] 00:34, 12 March 2007 (UTC))