Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 03:43, 19 October 2023

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Sanctions during the Venezuelan crisis article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 30 days

This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. International relations Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject International relations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of International relations on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.International relationsWikipedia:WikiProject International relationsTemplate:WikiProject International relationsInternational relations Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Latin America This article is within the scope of WikiProject Latin America, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Latin America on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Latin AmericaWikipedia:WikiProject Latin AmericaTemplate:WikiProject Latin AmericaLatin America ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Politics This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Venezuela Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Venezuela, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Venezuela on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.VenezuelaWikipedia:WikiProject VenezuelaTemplate:WikiProject VenezuelaVenezuela Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

On 29 June 2023, it was proposed that this article be moved from International sanctions during the Venezuelan crisis to Sanctions during the Venezuelan crisis. The result of the discussion was moved.

Text and/or other creative content from this version of Sanctions during the Venezuelan crisis was copied or moved into List of individuals and entities sanctioned during the Venezuelan crisis with this edit on 2023-10-18. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists.

More US Sanctions

More United States sanctions against Maduro's regime officials: Treasury Takes Steps to Harmonize International Sanctions Efforts Against Venezuelan Officials — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.161.163.222 (talk) 01:21, 6 November 2019 (UTC)

And EU sanctions --MaoGo (talk) 11:29, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

More on tankers

• U.S. blacklists six oil tankers in new Venezuela-related sanctions (Reuters) --MaoGo (talk) 19:21, 3 December 2019 (UTC)

Important update to map

• Latin America, U.S. to ban travel within their borders for Venezuela's Maduro, allies (Reuters)--MaoGo (talk) 23:23, 3 December 2019 (UTC)

TIAR

• TIAR members approved santions against 29 individuals --Jamez42 (talk) 00:14, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

Passport handlers

Individuals related to SAIME were sanctioned:

• The United States Takes Action Against Maduro-Aligned Individuals.--MaoGo (talk) 18:51, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

2020 Parlamentary crisis

Supporters and members of Luis Parra's appointed board of directors have been sanctioned Reuters 13 January 2020--MaoGo (talk) 16:33, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

More planes

More planes sanctioned U.S. blacklists aircraft, amends general license in latest Venezuela sanctions (Reuters)--MaoGo (talk) 20:43, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

Conviasa February 2020 Reuters --MaoGo (talk) 09:22, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

Rosneft

US Blacklists unit of Russian oil giant --MaoGo (talk) 17:35, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

 Done --cyrfaw (talk) 09:05, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

I will update everything else one by one soon, please stay tuned. --cyrfaw (talk) 09:15, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

Oil transporting

• U.S. sanctions four shipping firms for transporting Venezuelan oil 2 June 2020--ReyHahn (talk) 18:04, 2 June 2020 (UTC)
• U.S. considers blacklisting more oil tankers for trading with Venezuela, sources say--ReyHahn (talk) 16:35, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

Parra visa sanctions

EEUU avanza sanciones contra Luis Parra, jefe del Parlamento elegido por 'chavismo' y oposición minoritaria --Jamez42 (talk) 13:23, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

• Parra sanctioned by the EU--ReyHahn (talk) 08:39, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

Swiss sanctions

• --ReyHahn (talk) 11:41, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

Indictments

Albeit noteworthy, I'm not sure that yesterday's indictments by the US Department of Justice are in the scope of the sanctions. --Jamez42 (talk) 14:09, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

verifikado.com appears unreliable and spam

• User_talk:NoonIcarus#verifikado.com_as_a_reference
• Talk:Jeffrey_Sachs#Expansion_attempts_of_Venezuela_section
• Misplaced Pages:Administrators'_noticeboard/Edit_warring#User:Hipal_reported_by_User:NoonIcarus_(Result:_No_violation)

I've tried to get editors to explain how we could possibly consider verifikado.com as reliable. After three weeks, I'm treating it as spam. -Hipal (talk) 00:17, 26 July 2022 (UTC)

(Strikeout last sentence above). It's been over three weeks, and there's no consensus that it's reliable. --Hipal (talk) 20:23, 26 July 2022 (UTC)

Saying that no explanations have been given to support the sources reliability is demonstrably false: I have stated that "Verifikado is a fact checker"() and that "the website is not a blog, a self-published reference or has any indications that suggest that it is unreliable, particularly without examples." ). User SandyGeorgia has also commented this, pointing out at Verifikado's status as a fact checker and commenting on how she thinks that the source should be used (). The edit summaries of the restorations go into further details regarding this, and the complaint in the edit warring noticeboard reflects many of these things as well.

Another point I have stated is that it has otherwise remained undisputed for years (WP:SILENT). Not only the cart is effectively being put before the horse, shifting where the onus lies, but the lack of explanations on the dispute of the reliability also makes it harder to offer satisfactory responses. No examples or reasons have been given for the removal of otherwise referenced content (); When discussing the reliability of sources, what's common is to at least give examples on why it should be put into question. (). Even the title of this comment, "verifikado.com appears unreliable and spam", suggests that this assessment is based on personal feelings rather than on policy.

Now the claim has been shifted from saying that not only the reference is unreliable, but spam, which is equally confusing considering how little presence on the project it has (9 pages to be precise, 6 of which are talk pages) and considering that the source's domain is currently dead.

Considering all of this, I kindly ask you to remove the inline tag and leave the text as it was before you started editing. --NoonIcarus (talk) 02:33, 26 July 2022 (UTC)

Sorry, no. --Hipal (talk) 15:56, 26 July 2022 (UTC)

Centralizing thread at Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Venezuela/Reliable and unreliable sources#Verifikado. --NoonIcarus (talk) 12:16, 27 July 2022 (UTC)

Potential errors on the map

I noticed something strange about the map at the top of the article, the one that shows countries have introduced sanctions against Venezuela. For the most part it looks correct to me, but I noticed that parts of Northern Norway, Central Norway and all of Svalbard are marked as green. Did these particular regions introduce their own sanctions against Venezuela or is this just a mistake with the map? Not a Sandwich (talk) 14:22, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

The Lancet

Why is the discussion in The Lancet not included in the entry? The Lancet is one of the WP:RS specifically cited in WP:MEDRS. Nbauman (talk) 22:14, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

@Nbauman: Is this the Lancet article you are mentioning that I placed in this edit? WMrapids (talk) 07:33, 18 October 2023 (UTC)

Requested move 29 June 2023

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. Per WP:CONCISE. (closed by non-admin page mover) ❯❯❯ Raydann 09:07, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

International sanctions during the Venezuelan crisis → Sanctions during the Venezuelan crisis – None of these sanctions are international, on the contrary all sanctions against Venezuela are unilateral sanctions imposed by a few states and multinational organizations, including the US, the EU, Canada and probably a few other countries. Hence, the article name is misleading and should be moved to a more appropriate article name. The term "international sanctions" give a false impression that the sanctions are in fact international and sanctioned by the United Nations, when they are in fact not. Te og kaker (talk) 21:01, 29 June 2023 (UTC) — Relisting. ModernDayTrilobite (talk • contribs) 15:14, 7 July 2023 (UTC)

Comment: I do not get it. The complain here is that these international sanctions are not worldwide sanctions?--ReyHahn (talk) 21:39, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

The complaint is that these sanctions are not in fact international but unilateral sanctions (unilateral and international are two different things, learn the difference). This makes the article name misleading, as there are no international sanctions against Venezuela, only unilateral ones. --Te og kaker (talk) 21:52, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

If you want to reach consensus please take your time on explaining your terms. Do you know how that differs from other articles called "International sanctions during X"? (truly curious here--ReyHahn (talk) 22:17, 29 June 2023 (UTC))

I don't recommend focusing significantly on this (the policy Misplaced Pages:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS applies), but even Sanctions against North Korea is worded without the "international," and of course those sanctions even include UN Security Council-imposed sanctions. JArthur1984 (talk) 23:15, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

• Weak support: I think that some sanctions here can be considered international sanctions (per the Misplaced Pages article definition) however as there are also some unilateral sanctions I think the proposed article covers both.--ReyHahn (talk) 22:28, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose for now, I think I misread the international sanctions article. In the lead it seems to say that international sanctions can be issued by other countries and not necessarily by a collection of countries. There is no proof so far that "international sanctions" equals "UN sanctions". A good definition of "international sanctions" from a notable source is needed to solve this debate. As of now, it seems like a matter of taste and maybe a general RfC on the question could help us to standardize the title of many of the articles that have "sanctions" on their title.--ReyHahn (talk) 19:06, 7 July 2023 (UTC)

• Support. The proposed name is clearer and better represents the scope of article which involve multiple sovereignties imposing sanctions as opposed to any international body. JArthur1984 (talk) 23:11, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
• Support per WP:PRECISE. 〜 Festucalex • talk 19:08, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose in articles such as International sanctions during the Russo-Ukrainian War, multilateral organizations are considered international organizations, as ReyHahn has stated. --NoonIcarus (talk) 10:20, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose Neutral. Even apart from sanctions by multilateral organizations, sanctions by countries against another country are included in international sanctions. {{replyto|SilverLocust}} (talk) 23:58, 6 July 2023 (UTC)

That being said, I am fine with the shorter title, so I am neutral. {{replyto|SilverLocust}} (talk) 08:11, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Note: WikiProject International relations has been notified of this discussion. ModernDayTrilobite (talk • contribs) 15:14, 7 July 2023 (UTC)

Support. "Sanctions" is much more WP:concise than "International sanctions". CLYDE /_{STUFF DONE} (I will not see your reply if you don't mention me) 03:05, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

• Support for brevity. Just like we have Sanctions against Iran instead of International sanctions against Iran or Sanctions against Yugoslavia instead of International sanctions against Yugoslavia. The word "international" does nothing in the title. :3 F4U (they/it) 02:44, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Content moved without attribution and misinterpretation of size

Please see WP:CWW on the improper move of the list and the post at User talk:WMrapids re this being the third time at least that same has happened.

Further, with respect to size, removing a list does absolutely zero to the readable prose size, as lists are not calculated in readable prose.

WMrapids, PLEASE begin to use article talk pages to discuss your edits so as not to create unnecessary cleanup work for other editors. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 13:15, 18 October 2023 (UTC)

The size (300k) was simply too large. There are multiple issues here; the old article size results with choking, Misplaced Pages is not a directory and verifiability does not not guarantee inclusion. The split is justified, especially since the inclusion of all entities and individuals on the project is questionable. After the split, many notable sanctions are still included in the history of sanctions in prose throughout the article. WMrapids (talk) 18:00, 18 October 2023 (UTC)

In addition to the incorrectly attributed move of the individual list, other content was blanked. There are better ways to trim this article; pls engage talk before reverting again, and gain consensus about the best way to proceed towards trimming the article (it is now just above 10,000 words of readable prose, so bringing the size down is not unmanageable, and it can be done without leaving an unintelligible sub-article). This is an odd statement ("inclusion of all entities and individuals on the project is questionable") since the article could not be a featured list (a sample of Misplaced Pages's best work) if it was not complete. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:09, 18 October 2023 (UTC)

So you're going to ignore the choking issues that face readers and users? WMrapids (talk) 23:51, 18 October 2023 (UTC)

I'm not "ignoring" anything; you made a messy move, didn't clean up after yourself, didn't seek consensus, blanked content, etc. so the mess has been reverted. Collaboratively reducing the size is the way I roll, and you well know that, as you saw a model of how to proceed collaboratively right here. I do not intend to continue to do all the cleanup that results from non-collaborative, non-consensual editing. Clean up the messes you left, including this, and then discuss with others the best ways to reduce size here (which aren't necessarily the way you did it). SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:43, 19 October 2023 (UTC)

Why would I need consensus for an initial edit? Must I ask you for permission for each edit on Venezuela-related topic? As I have already said, I made a mistake with my initial edits and have fixed them for the most part. WMrapids (talk) 03:23, 19 October 2023 (UTC)

Of course you don't need anyone's permission to edit, but when editors make non-collaborative editing a habit and then leave the cleanup for others, they can expect to be reverted when patience is exhausted. Doing a correct content move takes a lot of work to get both ends right, you didn't do that, perhaps you didn't notice the hours it took to get the Silvercorp Agreement right, and asking others for help on talk is not a bad idea and gets the job done more quickly and with less agida. If you are willing to slow down, engage talk and edit collaboratively, I'll be happy to go back through this article and do some trimming; that is, since I wrote a lot of the content, I hopefully won't ruffle anyone's feathers by ditching some of it. (I already pulled some poorly sourced bits that were added during my break from Venezuelan topics.) But I am not interested in being reduced to secretary and mediator again on another topic. And I won't be home for two more days, and have exhausted my hotspot data limit, so patience. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:43, 19 October 2023 (UTC)

And for questions about similar lists, please see the consistent title use in List of people and organizations sanctioned in relation to human rights violations in Belarus and List of people and organizations sanctioned during the Russo-Ukrainian War.--WMrapids (talk) 18:04, 18 October 2023 (UTC)

All manner of garbage is to be found on Misplaced Pages; I suggest consulting WP:FL for better examples. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:10, 18 October 2023 (UTC)

Gratuitous tagging

Many of these tags were gratuitous; some already had secondary sources, some didn't require secondary sources (attributed opinions), and a (very) few were valid. I've cleaned up those I could; there are still two big chunks of primary-sourced text which may be given UNDUE weight if secondary sources don't back them. Cleaning up size issues will be easier if sourcing is first clean. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:11, 19 October 2023 (UTC)

• Biography articles of living people
• All unassessed articles
• B-Class International relations articles
• Mid-importance International relations articles
• WikiProject International relations articles
• B-Class Latin America articles
• Unknown-importance Latin America articles
• Latin America articles
• B-Class politics articles
• Unknown-importance politics articles
• WikiProject Politics articles
• B-Class Venezuela articles
• Mid-importance Venezuela articles
• Venezuela articles