Talk:Daktari Ranch affair

Title

The title for this article was created in haste, because I was trying to clean the text out of Hugo Chavez, where it was taking up way more space than was appropriate. Assuming this survives VfD, let's come up with an alternate place to store it. 2004 Venezuelan paramilitary incident? Arrest of Colombians in Venezuela, 2004? Something along those lines to focus it and make it more NPOV. (That is, the opposition narrative about this event is that it was invented by Chavez to persecute his opponents (chiefly Alonso); a title that fits both the Chavista narrative (a coup averted) and the opposition narrative (a state gone power-crazy). DanKeshet 04:14, Mar 14, 2005 (UTC)

I renamed the section in Hugo Chavez "Arrest of alleged paramilitaries". I think that this is a good idea for the title of this page, though that's too vague. Arrest of alleged paramilitaries in Buruta, Venezuela Arrest of alleged paramilitaries in Venezuela, 2004. Roberto Alonso affair? :) DanKeshet 06:50, Mar 15, 2005 (UTC)

from Vfd

On 13 Mar 2005, this article was nominated for deletion. The result was keep and cleanup. See Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Alleged planned Venezuelan coup in 2004 for a record of the discussion. —Korath (Talk) 04:19, Mar 19, 2005 (UTC)

word choice

hypothesized is used correctly but is poor word choice here. you refer to the plot as putative, yet the word hypothesized in this context implies that the explanation of the event as a coup attempt is in doubt. using putative in the title seems to imply that if there is any doubt it is suspect. the obvious word choice is apparent, which directly states the validity of the fact is in question but not sufficiently to warrant a cautionary term like hypothesized.

Re: Title

The use of 'putative' in the title does not in my opinion maintain NPoV standards as it elevates the side of the debate which denies that the coup actually took place.

To compare: The article on The Holocaust isn't listed as "the putative Holocaust" even though there are people out there who dispute its historicity.

Even the government of Canada in this undoubtedly biassed anti-Chavez article still nevertheless acknowledges that Chavez was indeed overthrown and removed from power for a period of time.

According to the 2006 Random House Unabridged Dictionary "Coup D'etat" is defined as:

• "A sudden and decisive action in politics, esp. one resulting in a change of government illegally or by force."

According to the American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language (4th Ed), 2006 "Coup D'etat" is defined as:

• "The sudden overthrow of a government by a usually small group of persons in or previously in positions of authority."

Thus, empirically speaking, what happened in 2004 was a Coup D'Etat. We may debate over who was behind it; whether it was a more or less serious offence; et cetera, but this should be done in the body of the article, not the title.

Moreover, the Spanish language version of the page on Hugo Chavez does not call into question the fact that the coup actually happened. You can read a translated version of that page here

Thus this article should be re-titled "2004 Venezuelan coup d'état attempt" (matching the Spanish version of this article) but should contain a significant section therein discussing the disputed historicity of the events.

If nobody has any problem with that, I will change the title of this article.

Ottawastudent 17:12, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Please notice this is not the 2002 Venezuelan coup d'état attempt but an incident that happened 2 years later. Venezuelan press, including official agencies, usually refer to this incident as "El caso de los paramilitares" (The paramilitaries affair). JRSP 19:01, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Re: Title -- Mea Culpa

haha. Wow, I'm an idiot. I stumbled over this article through a google search and was shocked. I didn't even think about the date, I just saw the title and got pissed off at what I thought was a distortion of monumental proportions.

My mistake. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ottawastudent (talk • contribs) 14:29, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Dead link

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

• http://www.eluniversal.com/movil/13A475161.html
  • In 2004 putative Venezuelan coup d'état attempt on 2011-05-25 07:51:16, 404 Not Found
  • In 2004 putative Venezuelan coup d'état attempt on 2011-06-11 12:45:05, 404 Not Found

--JeffGBot (talk) 12:45, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Dead link 2

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

• http://www.panodi.com/panodi/131343.html
  • In 2004 putative Venezuelan coup d'état attempt on 2011-05-25 07:51:16, 404 Not Found
  • In 2004 putative Venezuelan coup d'état attempt on 2011-06-11 12:45:13, 404 Not Found

--JeffGBot (talk) 12:45, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Dead link 3

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

• http://www.elpais.com.co/paisonline/notas/Octubre052005/vene.html
  • In 2004 putative Venezuelan coup d'état attempt on 2011-05-25 07:51:16, 404 Not Found
  • In 2004 putative Venezuelan coup d'état attempt on 2011-06-11 12:45:24, 404 Not Found

--JeffGBot (talk) 12:45, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Dead link 4

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

• http://noticias.canalrcn.com/noticia.php3?nt=12388
  • In 2004 putative Venezuelan coup d'état attempt on 2011-05-25 07:51:32, Socket Error: 'A connection attempt failed because the connected party did not properly respond after a period of time, or established connection failed because connected host has failed to respond'
  • In 2004 putative Venezuelan coup d'état attempt on 2011-06-11 12:46:15, Socket Error: 'A connection attempt failed because the connected party did not properly respond after a period of time, or established connection failed because connected host has failed to respond'

--JeffGBot (talk) 12:46, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Seems to be NPOV (Yes, I know which event this is talking about)

I surfed to this article while reading about Venezuela so it must have at least some worth :)

The way it is now, though, seems to be in violation of NPOV. Although the previous commenter thought this referred to the actual coup attempt in Venezuela, much of what he wrote still applies. In particular, the use of the word "putative" (similar to "purported") begs the question of NPOV. With more than a quarter of the accused found guilty in a court of law, why is this 'purported' or 'alleged'? It seems that only the defendants and their families have argued that the process was unfair + this is argued by every defendant anywhere in the world.

Two more things strike me as odd:

1) The argument to make the Venezuelan state's accusation seem silly is lacking a citation + asserts that such a small number of people could not take on the entire Venezuelan military. This is a given. Venezuela actually said, at the time, that the Colombians were suspiciously involved in activities that led investigators to believe that they would impersonate Venezuelan authorities in a coup situation (exactly what happened during the prior coup attempt). They were, after all, captured while wearing Venezuelan military uniforms. Why is a group of "Colombian peasants" gathering at the ranch of an extreme right-winger and dressing up as soldiers?

2) The fact that Venezuela's president was kidnapped at gunpoint only two years earlier seems to be a relevant point :) Or, that the same thing happened to the president of Honduras (a regional Chávez ally). Or, that there is a history of attempted and successful coups in Latin America originating with the same group of people who comprise the Venezuelan opposition.

I will strike the paragraph mentioned in my point #1 but I don't think I know enough about Wikipedia process to change the article name. If some time goes by without a response here, I guess I'll figure it out (on irc or something).

ryan bagueros » i know en + pt-br + es » talk 14:24, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

NPOV: seems like facts of this case aren't widely disputed

FYI: I tried to find new citations about the press conference held by the families of the detained in Colombia but couldn't find anything in English or Spanish. There were some articles from the opposition point-of-view but nothing specific to the press conference. On the contrary, "the case of the paramilitaries" seems well=documented and accepted as a real, criminal conspiracy by Venezuela, Colombia, the OAS and so on. If anything, this article should be expanded with details of the case (including some fascinating insight about how right-wing terrorist networks in the Americas function). Again, I'm still new to Wikipedia, so I'll give some time before I make changes like this.

ryan bagueros » i know en + pt-br + es » talk 15:07, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived 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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved. Andrewa (talk) 14:21, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

---

2004 putative Venezuelan coup d'état attempt → Daktari Ranch affair – The current title is anything but neutral, there's was no coup d'etat, even the linkage between Roberto Alonso and the Colombian paramilitaries is vague and unreliable. The national press know this incident as the "Ranch (Finca in Spanish) Daktari affair", named after the property of Mr Alonso. Oscar (talk) 21:18, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

• According to normal English grammar rules modifiers generally appear before the noun, so it should be "Daktari Ranch". This also appears in sources.[1][2] —  AjaxSmack  06:32, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Adjusted, --Oscar (talk) 12:45, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Daktari Ranch affair. 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/20051025163847/http://rnv.gov.ve/noticias/?act=ST&f=27&t=25198 to http://www.rnv.gov.ve/noticias/?act=ST&f=27&t=25198

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:19, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Daktari Ranch affair. 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/20050310183850/http://www.greenleft.org.au/back/2004/583/583p18b.htm to http://www.greenleft.org.au/back/2004/583/583p18b.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070822173114/http://deportes.eluniversal.com/2005/10/03/pol_ava_03A616651.shtml to http://deportes.eluniversal.com/2005/10/03/pol_ava_03A616651.shtml
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.panodi.com/panodi/131343.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050306085744/http://www.counterpunch.org/wire06112004.html to http://www.counterpunch.org/wire06112004.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:29, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

Recent edits

@NoonIcarus: Can you provide an explanation for your edit? As @Burrobert:[3] and I have explained multiple times, you are blanking information and applying tags without explanation. WMrapids (talk) 19:04, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

I have already mentioned similar issues in other articles in the past, but focusing in these specific ones, you're removing all the doubts that have surrounded the events and have treated the event as an actual plot, where there have been several questions about its veracity.

I haven't had the chance to mention it, but I'm also worried about all the weight recently given to Robert Alonso, particularly when in previous years there have been problems about promotinal edits on him. You might want to take a look at the related Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Robert Alonso. Regards, --NoonIcarus (talk) 23:49, 7 December 2023 (UTC)