Talk:Timeline of protests in Venezuela in 2015

Why does this article exist?

According to the lead—The 2015 Venezuelan protests began in the first days of January primarily due to shortages in Venezuela,[1] with the first massive demonstration occurring on 23 January.[2]—this is an entirely different set of protests from what happened in 2014, despite that the parent article now treats them as one, and that the editors there (including the creator of this article) have repeatedly argued for considering the recent protests a continuation. This seems contradictory to me. Mbinebri ^{talk ←} 15:45, 16 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's pretty obvious that the first protests of 2015 protests would be in the first days of 2015 and not 2014 because they are separate years.--ZiaLater (talk) 19:21, 16 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You didn't address my concern: the timeline articles treat the 2014 and 2015 protests as separate topics while the parent article treats them as one. Mbinebri ^{talk ←} 20:01, 16 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There is one article for each year. Adding 2015 information to the other article would make it too long since the 2014 article shows the trends of the protests, such as massive protests in early 2014 over general displeasure with the government, protests following some shortcoming like power outages, or protests of insecurity or repression following a violent action/incident.--ZiaLater (talk) 22:52, 16 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I think you are using original research in deciding that "2015 Venezuelan protests" is a unique thing. Also, I thought we had already discussed your overreliance on La Patilla as the sole citation for news stories. See also WP:ROUTINE --Riothero (talk) 12:51, 17 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No, protests have been covered by more than La Patilla. La Patilla is Venezuela's most popular news source on the web with El Universal and Globovision falling many positions after allegedly being bought those close to Venezuelan government. I also find humor with you thinking protests are "routine" in Venezuela, Riothero, like as if it is a normal occurrence everywhere else in the world.--ZiaLater (talk) 17:42, 17 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

La Patilla being popular doesn't negate claims of it being impartial (see: Fox News). And WP:ROUTINE refers to a type of coverage, not an assessment of the protests, although it does in fact seem that some level of protesting is the norm in Venezuela. Mbinebri ^{talk ←} 18:19, 17 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I did not mean popularity makes it reliable because Fox News is the first thing I think of when I see that argument (also humorous how Riothero used Fox as a source as too). Also, every media source is biased in some way so some impartiality is to be expected. As for WP:ROUTINE, the coverage is not mainly "announcements, sports, and tabloid journalism" or "obituaries, sports scores, crime logs". Protests have actually been on the rise as of the latest statistics released for January. If this were to change in the next few months, however, then we could see what could be done. It will be interesting what will happen going towards the elections though.--ZiaLater (talk) 22:45, 17 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I may have cited the Fox website, but the actual source for the citation was EFE, a major news service like the AP and Reuters. Just as the actual sources for many La Patilla citations are personal Twitter accounts. So your comparison is illegitimate. La Patilla is an opposition news site (at the very least in the same category as Venezuelanalysis or any of the left-leaning sources you so frequently complain about) and you should not be using it as you do. FYI, yesterday's New York Times wrote: "On Wednesday, supporters marked the anniversary of Lopez's detention by gathering to demand his release. But the street-paralyzing marches and raucous protests of last year were nowhere in sight. Even though Venezuela's oil-based economy is in tatters and polls show support for socialist President Nicolas Maduro at an all-time low, demonstrations against the government have been small and sporadic. The opposition's momentum dissipated after last year's demonstrations failed to produce anything other than division, with ranks split over whether to push for change through the street protests like those favored by Lopez or by trying to win elections later this year. Lopez's wife gathered with a small group of supporters to mark the date of her husband's arrest, and asked Venezuelans to show their support for him by wearing white. But for most of the day, people in the plaza that was the epicenter of the protests in 2014 went about their daily routines." If you stopped relying so heavily on one-sided news sources, you would find that this is the mainstream NPOV view. --Riothero (talk) 13:18, 19 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Though the protests are sporadic now, displeasure is growing. You forgot to add the part about government oppression too. I don't have a problem that much with VA, only when it is not attributed (especially when it is just repeats what the government said). Like others have said before, due to the government purchasing, closing, etc. with the media (which is repeated by multiple reliable sources just like the "media role"), La Patilla is only stating that a protest occurred. They are not stating some crazy facts about how the government stopped all homicides in a month and then built 500,000 new homes for some people (we know that they're not all built from years ago and homicide is increasing). And if facts are used by La Patilla, they are only used as a second party source (such as the protest statistics). Like most else in Venezuela, there are those opposed or those supporting. Most of the time if there is news from La Patilla in my feed, I will look for a link from another news source just because it may be a better source. With Venezuelan media, there is always two different sides. La Patilla is mainly just reporting that a protest occurred and a certain spot, on this date and this happened. Nothing too crazy. As for the TeleSUR stuff that you've been propagating lately, things can be pretty humorous when they state things like..

"Despite constant harassment and attacks, the national guard were peaceful..."

"There was amazing, unusual police restraint..."

So when state-run television (majority sponsored by Venezuelan Government) like TeleSUR says this crap while social media in Venezuela is showing an entirely different story, I think you get the picture now (hopefully).--ZiaLater (talk) 16:48, 19 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Lead

Should we rephrase in the lead that "The 2014 Venezuelan protests began in the first days of January primarily due..." to "The 2014-2016 Venezuelan protests, which began in February of 2014, continued into 2015 due primarily due..." ? Im not too vested in pushing this change but my biggest thought here is that the link to the actual protest article might be better suited as a plain text wikilink rather than a redirect. DaltonCastle (talk) 02:58, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]