Talk:Bolivarian National Guard of Venezuela

Venezuela Mid‑importance

	Venezuela portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Venezuela, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Venezuela on Wikipedia. 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.

Military history: National / South America C‑class

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history

C

This article has been rated as C-class on the project's quality scale.

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	National militaries task force
	South American military history task force

Abuse

In the case of controversial claims, it would be good practice to quote directly from the source.--Riothero (talk) 03:06, 26 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Let's take an example. The HRW report claims that "Security forces repeatedly allowed armed pro-government gangs to attack protesters, journalists, students, or people they believed to be opponents of the government with security forces just meters away" (exact quote). The article should NOT replace the words "security forces" with "National Guard", and "armed pro-government gangs" with "colectivos"--as these terms are NOT interchangeable. Furthermore, the article should NOT report a claim as controversial as "colectivos and the National Guard worked together while firing live ammunition at protesters" (much less assert it as fact) unless DIRECT SUPPORT (as in the form of a quote) can be provided (failing to do that constitutes 'original research').--Riothero (talk) 04:03, 26 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You can take a look at at the recent edit I made. Is that better?--Zfigueroa (talk) 05:13, 26 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

All you did was remove the quote that you had selectively edited, leaving behind an unsupported statement about HRW's allegations. On page 12-13 of the report, HRW explains that it will *NOT* use the term 'colectivos', but instead "the term 'armed pro-government gangs' to refer to groups that carry out violent attacks that appear to be motivated by loyalty to the government". Since HRW has SPECIFICALLY DECIDED AGAINST USING THE TERM 'colectivo', to insist on using this term constitutes a profound misrepresentation of HRW's allegations. likewise with regard to your substitution of "National Guard" for "security forces". If HRW does not specifically identify the "National Guard" in its allegations, then there is no basis for (mis)representing HRW's allegations as having done so.--Riothero (talk) 06:56, 26 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

HRW says that the NG and police were there then the man who was shot in the abdomen reported that the security forces there (NG and police) grouped with the armed groups and fired at the protesters.--Zfigueroa (talk) 17:16, 26 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If the HRW says that one victim reported that guardsmen and police were present when he was shot by armed groups, that is all you can justifiably write. you cannot extrapolate that HRW therefore 'reports' that the National Guard has 'worked with' these armed groups, since HRW has not made that allegation!--Riothero (talk) 18:59, 26 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Why would they even write it in the report's section about pro-gov. gangs with Gov. forces then? They are reporting through a victim.--Zfigueroa (talk) 20:09, 26 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What do you not understand? It is NOT in keeping with Wikipedia's guidelines to claim that "Human Rights Watch reports that the Venezuelan National Guard has worked with colectivos while dispersing protesters and that in some cases, the National Guard worked with armed groups that fired live ammunition at protesters" (what is written in the current revision) when the source does not DIRECTLY SUPPORT THE INFORMATION AS IT IS PRESENTED. The report does not even use the term 'colectivos' (as explained above), much less claim the National Guard "has worked with colectivos while dispersing protesters". Furthermore, the possible testimony of a man who told HRW that he was shot by armed gangs while members of the guard and police were allegedly present or "nearby" is NOT a sufficient basis to (mis)represent HRW as reporting that the National Guard "worked with armed groups that fired live ammunition at protesters" (I say 'possible testimony' because I could not locate the specific incident you describe in the report cited).--Riothero (talk) 23:39, 26 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Tupamaros

The Peru21 article does not support the claim that "National Guard also protected the Tupamaro colectivo as they attacked protesters". The article mentions the Tupamaros only in passing while commenting on pictures and videos of "masked individuals, armed with guns, on motorcycles and shooting at protesters"; it does not identify the armed individuals in the video as belonging to the Tupamaros. It merely states that "One of the best known [armed] groups are 'Los Tupamaros'", that the Tupamaros travel on motorcycles and in large groups, and that they operates in the barrio "23 de Enero". The reliability of the source is also questionable for conflating 'colectivos' with armed pro-government gangs, and generalizing about the National Guard as whole protecting armed groups on the basis of a one and a half minute Facebook video, featuring two National Guard trucks--one that drives off-camera onto a street where most of the action seems to be occuring, and another that idles (for 90 seconds, the length of the video)--in front of two or three motorcyclists who are not visibly armed, not shooting at protesters, and not identifiable as Tupamaros, except by the anonymous narrator who is not a reliable source.--Riothero (talk) 00:47, 27 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Since protests erupted on Wednesday 12, social networking hung pictures and videos of masked men, armed with guns , motorcycles and shooting protesters. One of the best known groups are "Los Tupamaros". As the video of this note, these armed groups operate with protection of the National Guard (Military Police) or before the indifferent gaze of the soldiers.

Yes these allegations are based on looking at a 90 second video. The identity of the Tupamaros is not independently verified.--Riothero (talk) 03:50, 27 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It says the Tupamaros are the most known of the groups that attack protesters then says that the NG either protects or ignores their acts.--Zfigueroa (talk) 02:25, 27 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The article is not based on independent sources, but on extrapolating nonsense from a facebook video. NOT RELIABLE. WILL BE REMOVED. --Riothero (talk) 03:50, 27 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please look at what you are deleting next time. You deleted a lot of source showing cooperation of the NG and colectivos (yes they used the term). I'm not doing a smear campaign. This isn't my opinion. This is just what is being supplied by sources. I know you probably want a police report, video of every angle, name tags of everyone in the video, but not even CNN, BBC, Al Jazeera etc. can provide what you're demanding. I know you have harassed me before to provide things for you and I did, yet you still demanded more. Riothero, if you can provide another story from sources it would be greatly appreciated. That's all I demand since you have not provide sources yet and only tried to delete my work from multiple sources.--Zfigueroa (talk) 04:42, 27 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Zfigueroa is right. bobrayner (talk) 18:10, 7 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Riothero's Reversions

First sentence: "The Venezuelan National Guard has also worked with colectivos while dispersing protesters and that in some cases, the National Guard worked with armed groups that fired live ammunition at protesters."

Source 1 (NTN24): Controversial photos of GNB and Colectivos working together.
Source 2 (El Nacional): GNB and Colectivos attack universities across the country.
Source 3 (Venezuela Al Dia): Will be removed due to mistranslation.
Source 4 (El Impulso): GNB protecting Colectivos attacking students.
Source 5 (Human Rights Watch) According to an interview with a man who was shot, Colectivos and the GNB worked together while firing live rounds. According to HRW's methodology (Pg. 33), "This report is based on in-depth interviews with more than 90 people, including victims of human rights abuses, as well as their families, medical professionals who attended to them, journalists, and human rights defenders". So, as said before, this is a report of the use of live ammunition by HRW that they have obtained through an interview (just like any other organization such as news, etc.).

Second sentence: "The National Guard also protected the Tupamaro colectivo that were "armed with guns, motorcycles and shooting protesters"."

Source 1 (Peru21): "Since protests erupted on Wednesday 12, social networking hung pictures and videos of masked men, armed with guns, motorcycles and shooting protesters. One of the best known groups are "Los Tupamaros" ... [T]hese armed groups (Los Tupamaros) operate with protection of the National Guard (Military Police) or before the indifferent gaze of the soldiers." Also, "There are even allegations that acted against protesters by the Bolivarian Guard in the states of Miranda, Carabobo and Aragua."
Source 2 (Ojo): "The Venezuelan guerrilla group called 'Los Tupamaros' acts with weapons and under the protection of the Bolivarian National Guard (GNB)".--Zfigueroa (talk) 20:42, 7 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

AK-103 Assault Rifle.JPG

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 08:52, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]