Talk:History of Venezuela

message: There is no information about the First or Second Venezuela Republics. I know they each lasted only around a year each, but i think it is worth mentioning, since after all the First Venezuelan Republic was the First Spanish American colony to declare it's independance.--ThrashedParanoid 16:11, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  First and Second Republic? 

message: This article goes straight from Gomez's death to the junta, saying that these two events were continuous but in fact this ommit Eleazar López Contreras and Isaías Medina Angarita
Maxmordon 16:02, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  A gap 

message: I would appreciate it if you removed the "lack of footnoting" warning at the start of the article on the history of Venezuela after independence to the end of the 20th century. I have put in a bibliography of 34 titles and have made 32 footnotes. I will in addition be adding more of both. I notice that the history of Argentina does not have this warning. It mentions exactly 5 books and has 3 footnotes!
122.163.190.193 10:57, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I removed the nofootnotes tag as I see a lot of work has been done on references. Just some concerns: (1) Wikipedia cannot be used as a reference for itself (2) www.aporrea.org is not neutral enough, let me see if I can find something else. JRSP 11:37, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

text: Your username was fixed you have to login with the new one, with uppercase R and F. Happy birthday, as a gift I won't bother you today but see you tomorrow :-) JRSP 21:42, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

text: As you prefer, it's a dynamic process; it is not like writing on paper. Remember rule #1 is be bold: If you see something in WP that can be improved, do not hesitate to do so yourself. JRSP 13:10, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

text: i used a couple of templates for the ref to your book, to show you the way. But, i couldn't find its ISBN. how come? --Jerome Potts (talk) 07:16, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Footnotes and bibliography 

message: Can anyone look-through anonymous edits from September 14. to 24? Roarjo 20:18, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Anonymous edits

message: Needs fixing, see milk plan. What is this?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.217.245.123 (talk) 10:56, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Tone of Article

message: The article makes no mention of the Venezuelan student riots, 
The BBC and other media are reporting on it.  Should this be in the History of Venezuela article or elsewhere?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by N2e (talk • contribs) 14:39, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Current events belong in wikinews. JRSP 21:36, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Since the current situation on Venezuela is so related to the university students manifestations I tried to explain the best I can – and the more objectively I could- the regrettable situation. It’s important to do it at least this way since the media are so limited, I know it because I’m leaving it, I’m a university student, yet I had to do it anonymously, security issues.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.35.74.59 (talk • contribs) 13:25, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I don't think this article is the appropriate place for reporting current events, maybe wikinews would be a better place. Also remember that according to wikipedia policies all information must be verifiable and editors must not include their personal analysis. Also, if you have "security issues" I would suggest you to open an account, it's free and it hides your IP address. JRSP 13:42, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Student Riots 

message: JRSP, Regarding your edits in the article and your comment in the Sutdent Riots section above, you are correct that Wikipedia is not a news wire, and that all encyclopedic entries must be verifiable.  Having said that, the poorly sourced material from 200.35.74.59, which you were correct to remove until it can be better sourced, points up a gaping hole in the History of Venezuela article.  Where is the well-written, well-sourced, encyclopedic summary of the rather substantial changes in Venezuela's political character during the changes of 2006-2007?  When I look at the TOC for the HOV article, it is as if nothing significant has happened.  This is clearly a large lacunae.  Is this being covered in another WP article on Venezuela?  And whether it is or not, does it not merit some encyclopedic summary in the History of Venezula article?
So I don't know the answers, but it is remarkable how the article could have so little on this critically important subject for the nation of Venezuela. N2e 15:24, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think we should avoid recentism, specially in an article about history. Looking at the article as a whole, there are more important things missing like pre-Hispanic period and the Spanish period. In my opinion there is too much weight on 19th & 20th century, not to mention including a current event whose historical significance is uncertain. Perhaps the Venezuelan constitutional referendum, 2007 would be a better place for these events. JRSP 16:07, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  What's missing in the article?  The very recent political/governmental [[History of Venezuela|history of Venezuela!]] 

message: Uh, 'was just trying to find out from when to when Caldera was president; 'read some stuff but didn't figure out the answers, it's kind of confusing (please don't answer that the topic itself is confusing). So perhaps the layout/progression of the article needs enhancing?
--Jerome Potts (talk) 06:34, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: OK i found Presidents of Venezuela in the "See also" section, where i got my answer, but still? --Jerome Potts (talk) 06:42, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  bug report 

message: So through out the 19th centery venezuela was a creole ruled oligarchy--J intela (talk) 10:28, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Creole Oligarchy 

message: The tags on this article are too extreme. It's not that bad. Sure, it could use some work, but the solution to that is to work on it. The tags serve no purpose. People don't need to be alerted to anything here. The tags were put on without discussion and I'm removing them. Ong saluri (talk) 05:12, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Tags

message: Unemployment benefits are called " hand-outs to those who could claim they were unemployed."
Referring to Nixon "It says well of him that when he reported on his trip, ... , he stressed that his country was partly to blame for the unfriendly reception in Caracas."  
This next paragraph is a whopper!  It has run on sentences, bad grammar, and more!
"AD knew that it remained the most popular party all over Venezuela: it chose Betancourt as its candidate. Caldera had no rivals in COPEI, the party he founded, and he entered the political fray counting on the conservative middle class. Villalba and his URD party adopted an opportunistic strategy, which was practically an admission that they could not compete with the AD national pardo popular base. It was the pardo masses in Caracas that Villalba was targeting when, instead of postulating himself, he chose Larrazábal, who also had the communists with him, to be the URD candidate. Larrazábal turned over the provisional presidency to a civilian and he went on campaign. When the results were in, Betancourt was elected for the term that ended in 1964, but this time by a plurality and not the absolute majorities that AD had gotten in 1946 and 1947. Caracas was no longer an AD redoubt. The city from then on became a marginal that could swing in any unforeseen direction and this time it went all out for Larrazábal, who came in second. Caldera did not do badly in third place and received proportionally more votes than he had in 1947. But the Venezuelan panorama was cloudy at best. Part of the 1958 demagoguery was that the UCV (Central University of Venezuela), which likes to style itself “casa primada” (first house of Venezuelan learning), was granted “autonomy”, which meant that the police were barred from the University City; and starting in 1960 it became a bastion of an insurrection that leftists started to recoup the chance they thought they had missed when Caracas was so politicized that they could get crowds in the streets by snapping their fingers, although Larrazábal’s showing with mainly URD votes should have taught them that they weren’t as popular as they thought, that they were not popular at all, to put it bluntly. Under its autonomy status, the UCV gave sanctuary to every leftist movement and its rectors were complicit with the communists or themselves Marxists[citation needed]. It got so bad that Caldera, when he finally got his shot at being president, was forced to close it for a year. But, as things in Venezuela have a way of taking surprising turns, when Chávez began to “revolutionize” Venezuela, the UCV was collectively, though mildly, opposing his regime[citation needed]."
Hmm.  Things have a way of taking surprising turns in Venezuela, but "the Venezuelan panorama was cloudy at best"!!
"the politics of repudiation had to have its pound of flesh"
" the Betancourt government made a fetish of import substitution"  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.179.190.92 (talk) 02:44, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  Agreed. Note also all the denigrative references to "Marxists" and "Communists". This is like the Fox News version of Venezuelan history. Somebody needs to go through this article line by line and extract all this garbage. 118.209.165.31 (talk) 23:43, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sounds like it was written by a partisan blogger. 

message: According to other articles on Wikipedia, Rooke was not killed in action as this article claims. He was shot in the arm, which was amputated. He died some days after that. He did not die in the battle.189.216.204.129 (talk) 17:56, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Rooke

message: Since Chavez's death more than a year ago, some details in this article have changed. These need to be updated such as the new presidency of President Maduro.--Zfigueroa (talk) 02:21, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Updated info

message: The term "United States of Venezuela" was used for the First Republic of Venezuela and the Second Republic of Venezuela, but it is not mentioned at History of Venezuela. So where (if anywhere) should the redirect 
 be targeted? Please contribute to the discussion at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 October 26#United States of Venezuela. Thanks, Thryduulf (talk) 10:50, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  United States of Venezuela 

message: This article, like many others concerning Venezuela directly or peripherally, has been victimized by an incompetent editor. His editing appears to consist almost entirely of adding content copied from other Wikipedia articles, often large amounts of text intact or with only slight changes, and without the required attribution. Don't be fooled by the fact that he includes sources; he merely copies these as well from the editing page of the articles he lifts from. I advise other editors to keep an eye out for content added by IP 2600:1001:b113:6ef0:c0b:304c:ad8e:d2d3, or from a similar range. Carlstak (talk) 17:10, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article full of content copied by incompetent IP editor from other Wikipedia articles 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on History of Venezuela. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110904200841/http://en.amigosprecolombino.es/cultures/central-america-and-intermedia/venezuela to http://en.amigosprecolombino.es/cultures/central-america-and-intermedia/venezuela
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140224203551/http://www.el-nacional.com/politica/Cabello-especial-organismos-seguridad-Apure_0_351565090.html to http://www.el-nacional.com/politica/Cabello-especial-organismos-seguridad-Apure_0_351565090.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:17, 5 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The section on the Pre-Columbian period in Venezuela makes mention of the "Meso-Indian period" and "Neo-Indian period," but lacks citations or helpful links to describe in more detail what characterized those periods or separated them from earlier and later eras (minus a statement that the latter ended when Spanish colonization began). Including links to more information could help contextualize the surrounding information within the broader scope of pre-Columbian history in the rest of Latin America and the Americas as a whole.
Worse, looking up the Meso-Indian period on WP redirects to the Archaic period of North America, and there doesn't seem to be an article on such a specific time period in relation to Latin America. Since there are multiple ways in which archaeologists and historiographers divide up pre-Hispanic history, it would be helpful to see the work behind some authors who might use the two terms. Etymographer (talk) 03:34, 24 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Meso- and Neo-Indian Periods 

message: : 
I think something got lost in translation here, and obviously, we need sources to clarify.  It's not immediately clear how neglect from colonial rulers led to "increased zeal for learning".  Also, we are supposed to avoid self-references like "one should not belabor this point".  I think a rewrite is needed. Viriditas (talk) 00:05, 29 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Zeal for learning"