Talk:Thor Halvorssen (businessman)

message: I did substantial cleanup of this new article, including:
*Corrected name to Halvorssen Hellum (Venezuelan names aren't hyphenated and the HRF source gives Halvorssen Hellum's name correctly without a hyphen).
*Removed the source on the Yallop book, as it doesn't substantiate that Yallop wrote about the Halvorssen case.  I've found no source for that info.  Linking to a website about the book isn't the same as citing that the book was about the Halvorssen case.
*Removed some of the unencyclopedic tone.
*Corrected the ref formatting, but did not check the new refs.
I'm concerned about the reliability of the Ashenoff source.  I'm particularly concerned that better sources should be provided for the whole Pablo Escobar thing, since linking to a bail bond agency for that kind of info might run afoul of BLP.  
It would be good to expand the professional bio section to discuss more of his tenture at CANTV.
Hopefully someone who knows the Castro Llanes case well can find better sources and verify the info.  SandyGeorgia (Talk) 05:41, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Some article changes

message: I've just returned from my library.  Sugargrrl, I realize that learning all of Wiki policies is a steep learning curve, but when it comes to biographies of living persons, we must get it right.  We cannot add information to biographies that is not scrupulously sourced to reliable sources.  It is very important that you understand this before you continue adding info to the articles.  I know it's complicated; don't worry, you'll get there.  If you're unsure, you can post something to the talk page where others can review it first.
The research librarian searched on the title ("Presumed Guilty"), the author (Isabel Hutton) and within the July 1994 issue of Gentleman's Quarterly and found no record of the article cited.  Thus, WP:BLP obligates me to immediately delete that information, which I will do next.  If you can give me a better indication of where you got that info, we can always retrieve deleted text from article history and easily reinstate it, so pls don't worry that your work will be lost.  No, e-mailing the info to me will not help; any Wiki reader needs to be able to locate the information; if I can't find it, neither can the average reader.
I've also been trying to verify your information about Unholy Alliance.  According to the research librarian, the book was from a very obscure publisher (one she had never heard of), and has been out of print since about 2000.  That may good enough for Hollywood, but it may not be good enough for sourcing information about living persons on Wikipedia.  There are a number of us here who can work with you to build an article to Wikipedia standards and policies, but it may be helpful to slow down, read and understand the policies here, and then double and triple check your sources, making sure that any text you enter is true to the source.  We're here to help, but the kind of information you're adding is very sensitive, and we must get it right.  SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:11, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sandy, the GQ article is July 1994, Issue 61, British GQ, Geena Davis on the cover: "Curtain Up on Geena Davis" and the article on Halvorssen Hellum is the main feature and begins on Page 80 and goes until page 86.70.23.3.191 21:10, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Is there a difference between the British GQ and the USA GQ?  My library is closed now.  SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:12, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

text: Sugargrrl, your boss is going to have to understand that entries in Wikipedia must conform to Wiki policies, particularly on biographies of living persons.  I know that "putting [deleted info] back again is going to be a pain", but I'm devoting a very nice Saturday afternoon to helping you, and it's also taking a lot of my time, OK ?  <smile>  You just added info sourced to a blog, and blogs are not reliable sources.  Please, please slow down and take some time to review Wiki policies.  And, believe me, you don't need to tell me stories about the banking scandal in Venezuela, or what happened to Halvorssen at the hands of Castro Llanes, or what happens to good honest decent people in Venezuela today.  I can assure you that I have a very personal and profound understanding of the issues and the personalities here.  What I know or what you know is not important; entries to Wiki biographies must be scrupulously sourced.  You can go to my userpage and click on the link on the left hand side to e-mail me the PDF of the British GQ.  And don't panic if someone deletes one of your entries; they can easily be retrieved from history.  SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:26, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Also, if your boss is giving you a hard time about the article "see-sawing", please have him or her look at WP:NOT, and point out the disclaimer at the bottom of every editing page here:  "If you don't want your writing to be edited mercilessly or redistributed by others, do not submit it."  Anyone can edit Wikipedia, and the info will change, and it can't be "spun" to promote a movie.  Like you, I want the true story told, but it must be correctly sourced, and JRSP will be following Wiki policies if he deletes text from a bio that is not scrupulously sourced.  SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:37, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

text: No, it's quite doable, because I will help you.  E-mail me the GQ article.  Letters written by Escobar aren't necessarily usable here unless they are published by a reliable source. Maybe a tour through WP:ATT will help get you up to speed.  Don't worry about the Cuntreras-Caruana article; you're trying to work in too many places at once.  If you get it right here, they'll grab the references from here.  Concentrate on getting one article right, and we can build from there.  I, too, want the truth told, but it has to be told right, or it will be deleted.  SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:48, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

text: Don't worry; soon you'll be a Wiki expert :-)  I'll go check my e-mail now.  SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:55, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  GQ article and Yallop book 

message: Halvorssen says Yallop is "an old friend". . I think his book cannot be considered a neutral source. I also found that Yallop was kicked out of Venezuela for "intervening in internal affairs"  JRSP 22:28, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've just gotten all the documents from Sugargrrrl and will need quite some time to read through them -- they all look to be reliable, but I need time to read. I, too, am wary of Yallop.  Back in an hour or two.  SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:47, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Yallop

message: I think this was accidentally deleted in an edit conflict, it sounds relevant:
Halvorssen believed that Pérez wasn't responding to his reports on drug trafficking and money laundering and approached his ally, Venezuelan Senator Cristobal Fernandez Dálo. In 1992, he was appointed special overseas investigator of an Anti-Money-Laundering Commission by the Venezuelan Senate. He was a liaison between law enforcement agencies around the world, working on drug and money-laundering cases.
JRSP 04:25, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: it was messed up ref, that we both fixed.  Ok, now I'm really done for the night.  Still lots more to tell there.  SandyGeorgia (Talk) 04:39, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Accidentally deleted?

message: The citation says:
*Scott, David Clark. Venezuelan Anti-Drug Official Fights His Foes From a Prison Cell: Evidence suggests Thor Halvorssen was framed by Colombian drug lords and their Caracas `friends'; Christian Science Monitor. Boston, Mass.: December 20 1993.  
I'm almost certain that I added that citation to Thor Jr. long ago, and the sub-caption about "Evidence suggests ... " came from somewhere, but I don't see it there now?  Weird. Any ideas ?  Maybe I found the sub-caption on the tool I was using to search in the library? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 04:48, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Here's the diff. Perhaps it came from the Wall Street Journal article. JRSP 04:58, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll look tomorrow, too tired.  SandyGeorgia (Talk) 05:02, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I found it, it was another CS Monitor article but it should be "Halvorssen says..." not "Evidence suggests...". JRSP 17:15, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No, I'm talking about the actual article title, see below SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:33, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

text: Venezuelan Anti-Drug Official Fights His Foes From a Prison Cell Evidence suggests Thor Halvorssen was framed by Colombian drug lords and their Caracas `friends'; [All 12/20/93 Edition] Christian Science Monitor (pre-1997 Fulltext). Boston, Mass.: Dec 20, 1993. 
So, it looks like that was the full by-line when they ran it hardprint, even though the sub-title is not in the online version.  I'm not sure what to do here; I'm pretty sure Lexis-Nexis would return the same byline my local library database returns.  SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:33, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

text: I guess they just dropped that part in the online version to avoid the long title. I think we can leave the printed version full title in the ref. JRSP 17:43, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Christian Science Monitor source 

message: Something's wrong with the dates here, they don't work ... I think the charity dates are wrong, or else he was appointed to CANTV much later ? 
* ... he headed the Dividendo Voluntario Para La Comunidad, Venezuela's largest charity, from 1976–1979. Presidentes del DVC. Dividendo Voluntario para la Comunidad A.C.  Retrieved on July 21 2007 ...  When Pérez was elected in 1974, Halvorssen was appointed vice president of Venezuelan telephone company CANTV, later becoming president during the late 70s and serving until Pérez completed his term. Presidentes de CANTV.  CANTV.com.  Retrieved on July 22 2007.
SandyGeorgia (Talk) 05:02, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: He could be president of DVC and CANTV at the same time. Pérez first term ended in early 1979. JRSP 05:11, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

text: Vice-President, acting as President in 1977. Titular president in 1978. JRSP 05:19, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dates off 

message: I added my bit to the article. I think it is generally a bit biased in favour of Thor Halvorssen. As noted in the Washington Post article, Halvorssen was "controversial". - Mafia Expert 15:27, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Does anyone have time to locate this article on the Washington Post website?  We should try to avoid linking to copyvios, especially when there's an alternative, and this article is surely available at its original source. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:56, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

text: I agree most sources are sympathetic with Halvorssen though there are already some negative opinions like Manuel Malaver, for instance. I am specially concerned about the neutrality of Ashenoff & Associates, it reads as an Orlando Castro bashing page. Of course, the article is new and there are still important actors missing like Ramiro Helmeyer and Fermín Mármol León. JRSP 15:49, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you for your contributions, Mafia Expert; we only got the sources yesterday, and the work is QUITE incomplete.  It will take some time to incorporate all of the info in a neutral fashion, and I was planning to work further on the substantial issues today (as you can see from reviewing the talk page entries of yesterday).  The substantial body of the article hadn't even been addressed yet; yesterday I dealt with dabs, getting the structure in place, and filling in his background.  Just a note, I made corrections to your edits this morning to conform with various areas of Wikipedia's manual of style and established conventions in the article that conform with WP:DASH and WP:CITE/ES (the article uses Wiki preference for unspaced emdashes, and author first on sources), as well as WP:MOSLINK and WP:CONTEXT.  I'm not sure we should even be using Ashenoff as a source, but we hadn't gotten to that matter yet.  SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:30, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

text: On a separate note, Mafia Expert, I saw the post you left on Sugargrrls' IP.  She is brand new to Wiki, sometimes gets logged out, and isn't yet well versed in getting around Wikipedia; I don't know if she'll see that message.  I have the PDFs, but I'm not willing to forward via e-mail PDFs that I received from someone else, because I have these ridiculously strong beliefs about the privacy of e-mail and never forwarding something to a third party.  I see from your the e-mail address you gave to her that you're in Europe; can you get access to the original GQ article in a library?  Neither of the articles goes into any particular depth on the Mafia issue, so I fear you'll be disappointed.  With patience, I'll eventually get around to typing up those portions for this article.  SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:52, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Ok, just let me know. Bad news is that there is not much online material from Ven. newspapers from 1993. Good news is that it is a well-delimited time frame so I can dig for old newspapers if necessary. JRSP 16:53, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I just need time to type it up, and I've got a thousand other things I need to answer on my talk page.  I'll get to that next; I think you can probably fill in some pieces.  SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:57, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

text: I agree with you that we are going into detail about Castro Llanes. Maybe expand the article about him. On the other hand, the issue is difficult to separate. You need to understand who Castro Llanes was to understand what happened to Halvorssen. But that is why I did not mention tha Castro was bankrolling Intriago. - Mafia Expert 12:05, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll put up an outline later today of a proposed article structure, so we can all get on the same page.  We'll need separate articles on Helmeyer and Castro Llanes to cover some of that detail.  Mafia Expert, Sugargrrl is a brand new editor, still quite lost in all the Wiki rules, so we need to allow some time and patience for her to understand Wiki policies, consensus, NPOV, etc.  JRSP and I could pound out this article in a week or two, but we may need to take it slower.  There is definitely featured article potential here, btw.  SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:30, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Biased?

message: I haven't found this issue of eight days without charges in any of my reading yet; I'm hoping someone else can dig up something on that, or Sugargrrl will pop in and tell us where that came from.  SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:16, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: In 1993 executive authorities could put you in jail for 8 days without charges (Ley de Vagos y Maleantes, later declared unconstitutional). What I understand is that authorities kept him in jail for more than 8 days without charges which was illegal even with that law. JRSP 17:22, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Can you find a source?  It' hard for me to search in Spanish because I don't always know what keywords to search on.  SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:37, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: http://www.unhchr.ch/tbs/doc.nsf/(Symbol)/CAT.C.16.Add.8.Sp?Opendocument Quote, item 116: "El lapso establecido por la ley para que las autoridades policiales que hayan practicado medidas de detención preventiva pongan al indiciado a la orden del correspondiente tribunal es de ocho días contados a partir de la fecha de la detención (artículo 75-H del vigente Código de Enjuiciamiento Criminal). ". It was Código de Enjuiciamiento Criminal not Vagos y Maleantes. It was derogated too by the Código Orgánico Procesal Penal. Items 117 and 118 are related to this too. Do we need to source that this was the law in 1993? The document is from 1998. JRSP 18:09, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No, that's good for sourcing the law, but do we have a source that says he was detained illegally without charges for longer than 8 days?  SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:12, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I'm not sure. HRF says charges "were dropped" so perhaps he was charged after all. Let me see if I can get something online. JRSP 18:22, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Eight days 

message: Both sources mention drug money-laundering connection to Escobar via a letter. The Gazette mentions a controversy, but doesn't specify the nature of the controversy—darn, since these are PDF images, I can't do a text search and this is very time-consuming:
From GQ (very surface analysis, this is all):
: ... wonders how Castro, whose first job in the country was as a lowly insurance salesman, grew so extremely rich so quickly.  Perhaps there is a clue in a letter that Pablo Escobar, the late boss of the Medellin drug cartel, wrote to his lawyer, Jose Arturo Gaviria, in December 1983.  "His [Castro's] proposal interests me," wrote Escobar.  "It involves good profits to both parties and insurance firms are a suitable mechanism."
From Pennsylvania Gazette, p. 24 (more thorough detail, but still incomplete):
:Halvorssen says that Banco de Venezuela hired him to investigate the rumors of Castro's links to money-laundering and narcotics.  The rumors, claims Halvorssen, originated with the surfacing of a letter from Colombian drug kingpin Pablo Escobar to his lawyer. The letter names Castro and adds: "His proposals interest me ... insurance firms are a suitable mechanism."  The issue of the letter's authenticity still rages.
So, the Gazette seems to imply that the controversy has to do with whether Banco de Venezuela arranged falsification of letters?  Gee, wouldn't that be surprising.  JRSP, can you fill in the gaps on the nature of the controversy ? The way Hilton alleges it as fact is certainly a concern, and you can see the more careful language used by Fonzi in the Gazette.  SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:53, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Alleged Escobar letters 

message: JRSP, are there there other articles that discuss the Yuppie bombings?  Should I add the background here, or does it warrant its own article?  If so, we have to find a name, because the name includes quote marks, and it's best to avoid special characters in titles where possible, per WP:MSH.  I wanted to work on those and Yallop today. If we need a separate article, perhaps Caracas bombings (1993) ?  I don't like the idea of "Yuppie" bombings.  Or should I just add a background section here?  SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:01, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No mention of these events except for the Halvorssens' articles and a brief mention at Maricarmen Regueiro. Nothing in es-wiki (searched for Halvorssen and for Helmeyer). Eventually, if we need an article for the bombings, Caracas bombings (1993) sounds better for wikipedia, "yuppie bombings" or "terrorismo financiero" sound like tabloid headlines. JRSP 18:34, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  So for now, we'll just add it here.  There is so much information here that this is very slow going.  I think I've patched up the dates now, and dealt with establishing context for later implications of a CIA/DEA connection in the professional section.  It my be unclear at this stage why I added all that, but it has to do with the theories advanced later.  SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:54, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've got to take a break for a bit, and I'll work on the Yallop section later today; I hope your search skills can turn up something on the eight days and the Escobar letter controversy.  It's all yours for now (no edt conflicts!) I haven't yet looked into sourcing his father as Norwegian ambassador. I deleted the wikilink to his father because I don't imagine anyone writing that article.  SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:01, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Yuppie bombings 

message: I suggest that we remove the description (investigative reporter) of Isabel Hilton from the text, as she has her own article, and the additional description here gives undue weight to her over any other source (aren't all the other reporters also "investigative"?).  The GQ report isn't superior to any other source used, and has some factual errors.  She says the coup occurred in 1993, and she says Castro was successful in his bid to take over Banco de Venezuela.  She also leaves out any discussion of the controversy surrounding the Escobar letters (Talk:Thor Halvorssen Hellum#Alleged Escobar letters).  We should avoid giving that source any more importance than any other source, although I did leave the mention of GQ inline to make it clear that it's the British version.  SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:48, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Investigative reporter 

message: hi. thanks for being so patient with me and so helpful.
i am happy to scan and email everything we have here. we have boxes of newspapers from the time. we have every article written about the bombing case, from the first to the release.  Virtually all the media effort, until the involvement of Amnesty, Morgenthau, Yallop, and the British house of lords and house of commons, is entirely negative and ridiculously overboard against him.  things started to change when international outcry began.  halvorssen was held in the reten de catia which is a prison Pope John paul 2 asked the venezuelan government to demolish because it was so medieval. there is no question someone was out to kill halvorssen and eliminate any shred of credibility he could have in a u.s. court of law. the list, as the gq piece demonstrates, is a long one: gustaf gomez-lopez (banco latino), orlando castro (banco progreso), carlos andres perez (impeached due to the evidence halvorssen provided on his bank account), gustaf cisneros (banco latino), pablo escobar, the cuntreras brothers as revenge, or a combination of all of the above.
the case is thick like pudding and parsing out everything would take hundreds of pages.  he was issued an arrest warrant which venezuelean authorities call an "auto de detention" eight days after he was actually detained.  the first 8 days were completely illegal detention. there were never any charges against him formally prepared by the fiscale nacional's office, just the bench warrant.  it was rescinded by a higher court in december and he was freed.  so, the "charges" were just an arrest warrant.  if you think of it in the context of what he was put through there is a conspiracy afoot.  and i am not saying that because we have a project we are working on.
i have also all the copies of the escobar stuff including an affidavit from escobar's right-hand man "popeye" who is currently in a columbian prison. i can email it to anyone.  it mentions the orlando castro connection. in the end castro fled venezuela so if halvorssen was smearing him how did halvorssen cause the collapse of his bank plus charges from DA morgenthau? he'd have to be a magician. and the latino bank case is also another doozey. these are real facts with many criminal things happening.  why is it so hard to connect the dots and see halvorssen as the victim of a huge conspiracy?
the articles from when he was in prison are hard to put any trust in if one considers the evidence after the fact.  similarly, the 1994 piece in GQ and the gazette piece are seriously outdated.
sandy, orlando castro did take over banco de venezuela in the end, FYI. he partnered with jose alvarez stelling and did so.  jose alvarez stelling is a fugitive from venezuela considering not only did banco venezuela collapsed but so did banco consolidado--his own bank. the only main problem is that all of the newspaper copies we have here are not online. we have copies of everything from halvorssen-hellum's files 70.23.3.191 21:54, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It is not necessary that sources be available online. Just let us know the newspaper/magazine issue and somebody can try finding it in their local library; occasionally you can e-mail some article but we understand you can't email all the material you have. Also, please check the no original research policy: we can only say what sources say without adding our own inferences. The copy of the passport is a primary source, according to wikipedia policies a secondary reliable source is preferred, that is, a respectable newspaper/mags/media calling him "Ambassador", check WP:V and WP:RS for details. For instance, do you have a (secondary) source reporting that Shelton purchased the rights for the story? JRSP 22:17, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Also, Amanda, JRSP and I both know the story very well, so the time you spend typing it out could be better spent reading up on  Wikipedia's policies and what conditions have to be met in order to add information to Wiki.  We can't add something based on you having a copy of his passport.  Have you had time yet to read about attribution, reliable sources and no original research on Wiki? If there's no source for the purchase of the rights, that's no problem; we can just leave the tag on it until a source becomes available. Are you sure there's no industry trade report or something you can cite that to?  Also, you don't have to post full articles here; yes, the New York Times is a reliable source, but I can access those articles myself online via my local library, so posting them here only fills up the page unnecessarily.  Just tell us the basic info on the source (author, title, date, publication), and we'll let you know if we can find it.  For example, the only reason I couldn't find the GQ article is because it's British, but I have access to WSJ, NYT, Washington Post, Christian Science Monitor, etc. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:57, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Just another note ... another reason to avoid posting full articles here is that it's a copyright violation, so take care with that, OK?  Keep learning, you'll get there.  SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:58, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

text: Don't worry—there's no copyright police on this page, I just wanted to make sure you knew for the future.  I installed "hats" on the articles to shorten up the talk page.  If anyone doesn't like them, say the word, and I'll remove.  (Fair Use allows quoting of a portion, not usually the entire thing.)  SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:14, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Have material-lots of it

message: Amanda, I don't know who Edward Snider is, and I can't find him in the sources; which source is he in?  Because the documents are PDF images, I can't do a text search on them, and re-reading the entire articles to find this fellow will take a lot of time. Do you know what source/what page he's on, and who he is?  The article needs some context for him, and he has to be notable to have his own (red-linked) article.  SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:27, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edward Snider 

message: Hey, Amanda, I'm unsure whether to communicate with you on your talk page or here;  it would be very helpful if you'd weigh in regularly on the article talk page.  This edit has several problems.  Wording like "raged in" isn't encyclopedic; encyclopedias avoid hyperbole.  Also, you added info you said was from the Times article, but to a sentence cited to other sources, so that creates quite a mess.  It would be good to use that undo button now, and start over.  Each piece of text you add needs to clearly sourced.  SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:37, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The contra guerilla activities in Nicaragua in the 1980s are sometimes refered to as "civil war" but more frequently as "conflict". Different case for Guatemala or El Salvador situations that are usually known as civil wars. JRSP 03:57, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: As far as outside interference and the Contras are concerned lets call it what it was: counter-insurgency. I have changed it accordingly. - Mafia Expert 20:52, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Did you intend to leave it as  "during the counter-insurgency wars " ?  SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:10, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I am open for other wording. Civil wars is not reflecting the conflict though. - Mafia Expert 22:17, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Doesn't counter-insurgency stand alone?  Isn't "wars" redundant?  I really don't know, asking.  SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:22, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mixing sources 

message: This article has potential for featured status; the story is interesting, and there are ample sources.  Amanda, becoming a featured article means that it becomes eligible to appear on Wikipedia's main page as Today's featured article, where a gazillion people will see it, as opposed to being just another Wiki article.  You inquired elsewhere about all of the barnstars on my userpage; those are because I'm actively involved in the process of reviewing featured article candidates relative to the featured article requirements and helping other editors bring their articles to featured status.  If you will get up on Wiki's policies of neutrality, reliable sources and no original research (summarized at attribution), and if we can all work together, we have the basics of a good story and I know all of the manual of style and referencing requirements necessary to attain featured status.  If we are working at cross purposes and spending time making daily corrections to conform with the manual of style and referencing, it's not likely the article will rise out of the basement.
I propose the structure below just to get us going; the article organization may change as we get into this, but there is so much to cover that it will help if we're not working at cross purposes.  If we agree on a structure, we can divide up the work;  for example, I suggest we lose the Ashenoff sources, and that  can write a lot of the Castro Llanes article based on everything available in the New York Times, Washington Post, and other reliable sources.
=== Proposal ===
# The lead is writtten last, as a compelling, stand-alone summary of the entire article.
# Professional – similar to what is there now, expand if possible.
# Arrest and imprisonment – start with a two- or three-paragraph summary, and then branch into sub-sections below (the summary can be written last, after all the pieces are in place).  The summary will explain the basics:  that he was arrested, beaten, later released and absolved, but had many enemies who could have wanted him imprisoned.  Then we build the details:
## Caracas 1993 bombings and arrest
### Ramiro Helmeyer – a summary relevant to Halvorssen, but most of the detail can be expanded at Ramiro Helmeyer.  
## Imprisonment – discuss torture, Reten de Catia, organizations that came to his defense, etc. Then branch into all of his potential enemies who could have wanted him imprisoned.  
##Potential enemies – The order on these may change depending on the flow of the story.
### Carlos Andrés Pérez
### Mafia
### Intelligence and drug enforcement community
### Drug cartel – don't spend too much time on Pablo Escobar, as it's a very weak link, possibly forged documents
### Banking community – a summary, a lot of this detail needs to go to Orlando Castro Llanes
## Aftermath – he was released, orgs came to his defense, he fingered Castro Llanes in the press, fallout of banking scandal, information that has come to light since his release, alternate views of his role, etc.
# Book and movie rights – cover the Yallop affair and the movie
# Personal – similar to what is there now, expand if possible
SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:31, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I almost agree. Perhaps 3.1 (bombings) and 3.2 (Helmeyer) could be merged for this article (but both subjects can stand as articles by themselves). We also need to say what he has been doing after his release, but that can be covered in 2 and 5. The 3.4 "Potential enemies" section title could be a magnet for conspiration theories and original research, perhaps we could think of another title for this subsection. But generally speaking, I agree with the proposal. JRSP 17:20, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: We can tweak the titles, and merge/separate/expand sections, but this also gives us a means of dividing up the work.  For example, I'd like to start roughing out some sections based on the info in the sources Sugargrrrl sent me (there is SO much there to work with), so that you can fill in the blanks with sources available in Spanish. The GQ piece isn't thorough, but the Gazette gives me a lot to work with. Yes, we need to avoid titles that are magnets. Ideas ? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:32, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

text: OK, I merged Helmeyer and bombings above, so they're no longer 3.1 and 3.2.  SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:41, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, "Potential enemies" is a problem, and I'm not coming up with a better option. How about something like "Other parties" which is more neutral?  "Other players"?  SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:44, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

text: Yes, let's wait for other opinions but I like top-down design, working early on structure pays in the long term. I also listed the articles in WikiProject Venezuela to see if we get more input. I agree these articles have FA status potential. JRSP 17:56, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, let's see if we can get all parties to read the talk page; if not, I've got a lot to keep me busy elsewhere.  SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:02, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

text: Oops, sorry, I was already adding some stuff before I saw the proposal. My comments are: we cannot put too many of the details in articles about other major people involved, because they are not written (yet). The Halvorssen article needs to be a stand alone article in which major events need to be explained. For the time being it will be the main article on the events, untill others decide to expand articles on other people and events in which Halvorssen played a role. I am not planning to write an article on Castro Llanes, because I do not work on this issue. My curiosity was triggered by the reference to the Cuntrera arrests (and I doubt Halvorssen played a major role in that). I did read "La DEA contra la Guardia Nacional de Venezuela" by Manuel Malaver some years ago and was struck by the biased treatment of Halvorssen in this article. That is why I decided to add some other information. Other areas to expand are his role in supporting the Contra's in Nicaragua. I am sorry to destroy other people's image of the heroic exploits of Halvorssen, but I am afraid the guy is not the clear cut hero others make of him (and his son, by the way). - Mafia Expert 18:21, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Good additions.  I was taking it slowly to avoid WP:BITE, but perhaps your bolder additions will move things along faster.  Do you want to stay involved as we develop the rest?  SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:28, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't want to scare away newcomers, and I hope I didn't. But it can be a hard world out there in Wikipedia-land. Until now this has been a very cooperative and civil common effort, unlike some of the disputes I ran into. Let's hope it stays that way, you have done your part very diplomatically. Topics about Venezuela tend to go out of hand. I don't think I am going to be very much involved in this, but will check in every now and then. - Mafia Expert 19:45, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

text: By the way, if you have sources handy on the Contra issue, can you toss them our way ?  SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:30, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I see what I can do. I remember some mentioning about in Malaver's book, but I don't have that at hand right now. - Mafia Expert 19:52, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article structure 

message: # The lead is writtten last, as a compelling, stand-alone summary of the entire article.
# Professional – similar to what is there now, expand if possible.
# Arrest and imprisonment – start with a two- or three-paragraph summary, and then branch into sub-sections below (the summary can be written last, after all the pieces are in place).  The summary will explain the basics:  that he was arrested, beaten, later released and absolved, but had many enemies who could have wanted him imprisoned.  Then we build the details:
## Caracas 1993 bombings and arrest
### Ramiro Helmeyer – a summary relevant to Halvorssen, but most of the detail can be expanded at Ramiro Helmeyer.  
## Imprisonment – discuss torture, Reten de Catia, organizations that came to his defense, etc. Then branch into all of his potential enemies who could have wanted him imprisoned.  
##Potential enemies – The order on these may change depending on the flow of the story.
### Carlos Andrés Pérez
### Mafia
### Intelligence and drug enforcement community
### Drug cartel – don't spend too much time on Pablo Escobar, as it's a very weak link, possibly forged documents
### Banking community – a summary, a lot of this detail needs to go to Orlando Castro Llanes
## Aftermath – he was released, orgs came to his defense, he fingered Castro Llanes in the press, fallout of banking scandal, information that has come to light since his release, alternate views of his role, etc.
# Book and movie rights – cover the Yallop affair and the movie
# Personal – similar to what is there now, expand if possible
SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:31, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposal 

message: Comments ?  SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:31, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I almost agree. Perhaps 3.1 (bombings) and 3.2 (Helmeyer) could be merged for this article (but both subjects can stand as articles by themselves). We also need to say what he has been doing after his release, but that can be covered in 2 and 5. The 3.4 "Potential enemies" section title could be a magnet for conspiration theories and original research, perhaps we could think of another title for this subsection. But generally speaking, I agree with the proposal. JRSP 17:20, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: We can tweak the titles, and merge/separate/expand sections, but this also gives us a means of dividing up the work.  For example, I'd like to start roughing out some sections based on the info in the sources Sugargrrrl sent me (there is SO much there to work with), so that you can fill in the blanks with sources available in Spanish. The GQ piece isn't thorough, but the Gazette gives me a lot to work with. Yes, we need to avoid titles that are magnets. Ideas ? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:32, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

text: OK, I merged Helmeyer and bombings above, so they're no longer 3.1 and 3.2.  SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:41, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, "Potential enemies" is a problem, and I'm not coming up with a better option. How about something like "Other parties" which is more neutral?  "Other players"?  SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:44, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

text: Yes, let's wait for other opinions but I like top-down design, working early on structure pays in the long term. I also listed the articles in WikiProject Venezuela to see if we get more input. I agree these articles have FA status potential. JRSP 17:56, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, let's see if we can get all parties to read the talk page; if not, I've got a lot to keep me busy elsewhere.  SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:02, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

text: Oops, sorry, I was already adding some stuff before I saw the proposal. My comments are: we cannot put too many of the details in articles about other major people involved, because they are not written (yet). The Halvorssen article needs to be a stand alone article in which major events need to be explained. For the time being it will be the main article on the events, untill others decide to expand articles on other people and events in which Halvorssen played a role. I am not planning to write an article on Castro Llanes, because I do not work on this issue. My curiosity was triggered by the reference to the Cuntrera arrests (and I doubt Halvorssen played a major role in that). I did read "La DEA contra la Guardia Nacional de Venezuela" by Manuel Malaver some years ago and was struck by the biased treatment of Halvorssen in this article. That is why I decided to add some other information. Other areas to expand are his role in supporting the Contra's in Nicaragua. I am sorry to destroy other people's image of the heroic exploits of Halvorssen, but I am afraid the guy is not the clear cut hero others make of him (and his son, by the way). - Mafia Expert 18:21, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Good additions.  I was taking it slowly to avoid WP:BITE, but perhaps your bolder additions will move things along faster.  Do you want to stay involved as we develop the rest?  SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:28, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't want to scare away newcomers, and I hope I didn't. But it can be a hard world out there in Wikipedia-land. Until now this has been a very cooperative and civil common effort, unlike some of the disputes I ran into. Let's hope it stays that way, you have done your part very diplomatically. Topics about Venezuela tend to go out of hand. I don't think I am going to be very much involved in this, but will check in every now and then. - Mafia Expert 19:45, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

text: By the way, if you have sources handy on the Contra issue, can you toss them our way ?  SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:30, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I see what I can do. I remember some mentioning about in Malaver's book, but I don't have that at hand right now. - Mafia Expert 19:52, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comments on proposal ? 

message: *Castro Llanes, from Cuban descent, was considered unfit by the Venezuelan elite to lead the country’s most important banking insitution.[18]
This sentence needs reworking; being of Cuban descent is not cause for Venezuelan society to reject Castro Llanes, reference Gustavo Cisneros.  SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:24, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I reworked that.  SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:09, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cuban descent 

message: Yes, Mafia Expert, not only is the GQ report very "fluffy" on all counts (I'd still like to remove the qualifier on Hilton from the article), the link is weak.  Since you may not have the source, here is some of the text:
From GQ:
:Small wonder that the Italian authorities got no response to their repeated requests for the extradition of the Cuntreras, who were only finally expelled at the end of 1992 after an investigation into their activities by the Venezuelan Senate.  "Do you know," I was asked by Senator Cristobal Fernandez Dalo, chairman of the Committee for the Investigation of Money Laundering and Drug Trafficking, "who supplied the information that launched that investigation into the Cuntreras?  It was Thor Halvorssen."
GQ goes on to say Dalo was convinced Halvorssen was framed.  That's it.  Dalo has been described as Halvorssen's ally.  
From the Gazette:
:Soon, the bad guys began to feel his [Halvorssen's] sting.  It was in that position, for instance, that Halvorssen was able to push through an investigation of the Cuntreras and force the Government to honor a four-year-old extradition request from Italy.  The remaining Mafia in Venezuela do not remember Halvorssen fondly for that.
The Pennsylvania Gazette is more thorough than GQ overall, but its content should be viewed in the context that most of the Halvorssen family attended UPENN.  That's it; perhaps Halvorssen had a hand in launching the investigation or providing information.  Perhaps you or JRSP can find more in other sources; otherwise, it's a minor part of the story (although I'm sure that both the Mafia and Escobar will figure prominently in Hollywood :-)  SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:09, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cuntrera family 

message: I have done considerable research to address gaps, oddities in the timing, and problems of context.  Regardless of how many times MafiaExpert wants to alter this profile to underline the negative comments by the DEA that appeared in U.S. News the reality is these comments appeared when Halvorssen was in prison and was widely considered to have placed a terrorist bomb. This is not an insignificant fact. They were trying to distance themselves as quickly as possible. Especially if, as they said, he was an informant. Halvorssen's detractors at the time: Intriago, Castro, and President Perez were ALL later found to have been the ones engaging in illegal or criminal activity. All references to the DEA and "unusual ties to drug traffickers"--something that appears nowhere else and i cannot find any support for such a claim *anywhere*--are suspect given the little attention that has gotten when there is so much material on his work in other areas.
So, before you make any huge changes to my edits please let's discuss this in a civil manner.Sweetness 03:43, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think you did a great job here. The only thing I was concerned with was that the article should reflect that Halvorssen's involvement in drug trafficking investigations was controversial. I think that is now properly reflected. As far as the smear campaign issue, it is not that important. The remark that he was a victim as well as a prepetrator of smear campaigns was an attempt to summarize what followed in the article. The US News article is not the only one with negative comments of the DEA about Halvorssen. For a better understanding of this issue I suggest you read Manuel Malaver's book La DEA contra la Guardia Nacional de Venezuela (Gama Editores, 1999). But otherwise, I think your editing is balanced. - Mafia Expert 16:02, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

text: I also did some additional research and added material from Malaver's book, while retaining your edits. I hope you will do the same. I think we have now a balanced article  reflecting all the different facts and opinions. - Mafia Expert 17:59, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

text: Other sources referenced are also not directly available to many to review. Go to library and check it out. The article in El Universal is a review of the book describing the main issues. I think is a completely reliable source. The Malaver book is in fact one of the most indepth researches into this issue. This has nothing to do with my point of view. I could not care less. I think you should look at your own POV. You simply refuse to accept any criticism of your hero. Sorry you. I restored the edits I made. - Mafia Expert 12:33, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I agree Malaver's book is a valid source and that both paragraphs are attributed to "his adversaries" and "Manuel Malaver" so I don't think they should be removed, especially considering they help balance the generally sympathetic tone of the article. JRSP 12:56, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

text: Moreover, Malaver as a source was already accepted before. The Recuerdos del terrorismo caraqueño article in Tal Cual is in fact based on a chapter of the book. There was no problem with that at the time, why should it be a problem now? For Sweetness convenience I also added that Halvorssen denies being a CIA agent. So do not ever accuse me of POV again, I quote whatever reliable source I can find to give a balanced view. - Mafia Expert 13:41, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

text: I also changed the chnages that were made implying that the DEA only discredited Halvorssen after he was arrested. After re-reading the relevant sources that is not true. The Guillen Davila/Grimm affair took place in 1991, long before Halvorssen's arrest, although the sources that mention it are from the time of his arrest. That is probably the reason for the confusion. - Mafia Expert 16:53, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recent edits 

message: I moved Malaver's recontruction to the heading "Arrest and imprisonment" to put Halvorssen's arrest in context. However, I think the article structure should be changed because it does not flow chronologically. I propose to put "Intrigue and mutual accusations" before "Arrest and imprisonment" and re-edit it accordingly. Let me know what you think. - Mafia Expert 16:23, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Re-edit

message: The mafia don has unfortunately removed edits that were worked in order to eliminate redundant tet and to add balance to the article. it also removed portions that were clearly orphans from previous edits that add nothing to the reader or scholar. DonCalo pls keep the discussion HERE rather than making UNAUTHORIZED removals.  Thanks 208.125.21.226 (talk) 02:32, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Dear "Methinks", removal of sourced material comes close to vandalism. Nothing wrong with restructuring the article, but that is not what happened. The end result became an apology, in stead of a balanced article. The article has been the result of extensive debates and rewrites, and we are going to change that because of a few single purpose accounts. - DonCalo (talk) 18:28, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  reversion of doncalo's reversion