Talk:United Socialist Party of Venezuela

message: :Image:Logo PSUV.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 04:32, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Logo PSUV.jpg

message: Tony0106 (talk) 20:52, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Formation section translated 

message: "At its first convention the rank and file, despite the objections of the right wing of the new party, passed a resolution that clarified the party tradition as standing with Marx, Engels, Lenin and Trotsky."
This really, really needs to be sourced because I haven't heard about it anywhere. I know there is a vocal minority of Trotskyists within the PSUV, but the idea of them passing a resolution identifying the party as essentially Trotskyist is either inflated (e.g. passed an unbinding; ultimately useless resolution) or at worst simply wrong. --Mrdie (talk) 22:06, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  We don't want to conduct WP:OR about whether we see the party as having an orthodox Trotskyist tendency. Instead we want to follow WP:RS in their description.  There are at least three reliable sources that claim that Chavez, at the very least, intended to make the party Trotskyist in character. If other reliable sources contradict that perspective we should weight them appropriately and attribute their views. Simonm223 (talk) 18:08, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: I fail to see how  calling  a Trotskyist  translates to  being a Trotskyist party . This is some far-reaching WP:SYNTH. Yue🌙 02:16, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Trotskyist? 

message: It put a smile on my face, but it's better to undo what someone did with the "President" link.Josevillegascarmona (talk) 04:13, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Check the link for president 

message: Why is this party Marxist? I don't see a socialist Venezuela? Since 1999 Chavez has not brought socialism to Venezuela. So why is this party Marxist? I think that party is social democratic, left wing nationalist, but i don't think it is genuine Marxist or socialist. Hugo Chavez has not broken with capitalism, Venezuela is still ruled by capitalist and now they have the state as the biggest capitalist. So I would call their ideology not Marxist, but more like social democracy with a lot of Venezuelan left wing nationalism. --UDSS (talk) 22:40, 26 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Marxist? 

message: The PSUV is a left nationalist party. Why? Because they always use the Venezuelan flag during demonstrations, and the red flag of internationalism is never used. Also Hugo Chavez is very nationalist and loves his nation. A genuine socialist should not be nationalist. Nationalism and socialism are incompatible. Socialism in one nation ( Stalinism ) will not work, that is why Chavez is losing support. His left-wing nationalism will not make Venezuela genuine socialist. The PSUV is no fighter for the world revolution and will not unite Venezuela, Colombia and Ecuador in one United Latin American Socialist Federation. So that is why this party is not internationalist, but left wing nationalist. --UDSS (talk) 15:07, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Once again, please read WP:NOT and WP:OR. Wikipedia is not a discussion forum. You need reliable sources for your changes. Your own arguments are not sufficient. One would expect some improvements in your editing manner after all these years. Miacek and his crime-fighting dog  (t) 16:00, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Left Wing Nationalist 

message: Why does this article say there are 165 seats in the National Assembly while the National Assembly article says there are 167? Kaldari (talk) 22:42, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah, it looks like this article is wrong as it is actually reporting the number of seats for 2011, not 2010. Kaldari (talk) 22:47, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I've commented out the incorrect information for now. Kaldari (talk) 22:48, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Seats in National Assembly 

message: The label of being a democratic socialist party may seem controversial and objectionable from the view of other democratic or libertarian socialists, considering the controversy surrounding Chavez's rule. I would suggest the label simply be Bolivarianism and Socialism, without any further description as to being a specific brand of socialism.--Appledoze (talk) 20:13, 9 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: PSUV is committed to a democratic socialism based on participatory democracy. It's, er, a work in progress :) Rd232 talk 00:17, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Precisely because of that, I think it would be better to just label it as Socialism in general along with Bolivarianism to avoid any controversy.--Appledoze (talk) 09:53, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: No. It is simply illogical to require a party to succeed in its aims to the satisfaction even of its enemies in order to have those aims acknowledged. Rd232 talk 14:52, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The Soviet Communist Party aimed at establishing a classless stateless society of free workers, doesn't make it a non-statist party--Appledoze (talk) 19:07, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: That depends entirely on your definition of "non-statist party"; its aim was communism which by definition is stateless, but the practice was state socialist, understood as a transition towards communism (a transition that didn't seem to be transitory, but still). And do you really think introducing that example is helpful? Rd232 talk 04:20, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Democratic Socialist? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on United Socialist Party of Venezuela. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100505154454/http://www.abn.info.ve:80/noticia.php?articulo=232445&lee=1 to http://www.abn.info.ve/noticia.php?articulo=232445&lee=1
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070928042007/http://www.tribuna-popular.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=698&Itemid=1 to http://www.tribuna-popular.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=698&Itemid=1
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070611042600/http://www.ppt.org.ve/20070411.php to http://www.ppt.org.ve/20070411.php
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 19:15, 18 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on United Socialist Party of Venezuela. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090211012425/http://www.diarioeltiempo.com.ve:80/secciones/secciones.php?num=97234&codigo=nnac&llve=dos to http://www.diarioeltiempo.com.ve/secciones/secciones.php?num=97234&codigo=nnac&llve=dos
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 02:23, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I have updated the logo. It has been used for some time now (since 2016, I believe) but has become more incorporated in the official PSUV website and in recent election material/events.--ZiaLater (talk) 04:06, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Updated logo 

message: Even if they got something correct, it is distasteful and not encyclopedic to link to a propaganda website for any reason. For example, the article on the Soviet Union does not contain a single link to Pravda, and that's the way it should be. We should remove our propaganda site link immediately. If a good source is available, it can be added.Adoring nanny (talk) 13:28, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I have a dissenting view on Venezuelanalysis; in that I don't see it as being any more fundamentally propagandist or misleading than western media sources. I cite as an example a situation in Canada where a pro-Maduro supporter was interviewed by CTV (Canada) and the on-air broadcast edited the interview enough to make the statements unclear, and attributed it as a pro-Guaido statement. I'm aware of this as being a factual description of what happened because I had direct contact with the interviewee and they were not impressed with CTV for publishing distorted information regarding why they were protesting. Now I will note that, in general, I don't like the use of media sources on Wikipedia at all, regardless of their POV. But as per WP:YESPOV it's acceptable to use a biased source either by attributing their notable opinion, or, in a case like this, to support undisputed statements of fact. Deleting a source on a statement and leaving it with nothing is inappropriate. Simonm223 (talk) 13:56, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: And I'd say that Wikipedia's insistence that socialist sources not be used to describe the history of socialist countries is something of a sore point and one of Wikipedia's greatest WP:NPOV failures WP:BLUDGEONed through by American revisionist perspectives on history, so please don't think that your recently added example is anything relevant to discussion here except to point out that there are other problems with Wikipedia's handling of socialism both historically and in the present day. Simonm223 (talk) 13:57, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  It's not just a biased source. It's continually misleading. For example they have the following on their front page right now: "The Real 'Humanitarian Aid' in Venezuela: Gov't Supplies Food at Affordable Prices to Local Residents". Meanwhile, the vast majority of reliable sources are talking about how people are starving, or have left the country to find food, because Gov't supplies are unavailable for most people.Adoring nanny (talk) 01:04, 6 March 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: This claim is irrelevant to the way the source is being used. Again, you're taking a non-disputed sourced statement and stripping the source because of WP:IDONTLIKEIT - your personal opinion of the food-aid situation, and in fact the source having a different view on the situation from other sources is not a disqualifying circumstance. Again refer to WP:YESPOV and stop these WP:TEND WP:POINTed and inappropriate removal of this source. Simonm223 (talk) 15:09, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

text: I still dispute that description of the source. Simonm223 (talk) 17:09, 6 March 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: By all means, bring forth your evidence, per WP:BURDEN.Adoring nanny (talk) 23:47, 6 March 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Propaganda Website 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:
* 
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 02:52, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion 

message: If anyone has any problem with that, please let me know. I plan on translating more parts of the page in the future, if I'm able. --RomanKnight (talk) 4:20, 24 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Translated the "Ideología y posiciones políticas" section of the Spanish article into the "Overview" section of this one 

message: A separate controversy section should be added, as the party is extremely controversial. Cornelius Scipio Asina (talk) 03:35, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Controversy?