Talk:Rómulo Betancourt
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Reform of Oil Industry
I've been a long time surfer of Wikipedia but just constantly get frustrated with the quality and reliability of the content. I pulled this from a compilation of notes I made while reading Betancourt's book Venezuela Oil & Politics. I know all the page numbers it's just I'm not familiar with all the Wiki keys and symbols on the editing functions yet. I know I should play around in the sandbox first (and when I did, there was edit-clash or something like that) but I figure I'll get it figured out and then come back and fix this. It's better to have this up now I suppose.
I also changed the year and name of the original clandestine party that Betancourt founded that would turn into Accion Democratica once receiving legal status.
Maybe once I get good at editing I'll add some Schlesinger quotes on Betancourt so that it's not just Ronald Reagan!! Neoliberalism, right?...
AdrianLaTraceJr 05:17, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
This article has some normative language. "It became clear that Castro was arming the guerrillas" - source? This is disputed. The elections in 1963 were "a day of pride" for Venezuela? The landowners whose land was confiscated received "generous compensation"? This article should be made more NPOV. glasperlenspiel 21:21, Aug 20, 2004 (UTC)
- Cuba was unseated of OAS since 1962 because of that country funded guerrillas acting in Venezuela. Info: "Octava Reunión de Consulta de Ministros de Relaciones Exteriores (1962)". [1] (Sorry, spanish).
[edit] Reagan speech
Do we really need a speech from Reagan in the end about his death? I think a speech from a notable Venezuelian, such as his successor would be better.
- The word "Venezuelian" doesn't exist. Regarding your comment, I think it is quite remarkable that a foreign leader expressed his condolence towards the Venezuelan people in such words. --190.38.176.219 03:54, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] ==
This brief and concise biography of a complex character in Venezuela's political history is essentially neutral and correct. The above comments cannot be taken seriously without proper references.
- So, the previous "arguments" put "Rómulo Betancourt" article under suspition? Come on!