15:5715:57, 7 May 2020diffhist−313
m
Caudillo
→Central America: remove bit about sandinistas since the overthrow of somoza: it's not relevant (they were not caudillos); and it's misleading ("The Sandinista regime maintained power, but in 1990 elections were held" implies that there were no elections in the 1980s)
15:0115:01, 30 May 2019diffhist+22
Thomas Sankara
Reducing CNR policies to "his" policies, he was opposed by the governments of cote d ivoire and France but loved by the people of these countries especially the formerTags: Mobile editMobile web edit
14:5814:58, 30 May 2019diffhist−236
Thomas Sankara
That's mostly moral judgements, and "trade unions and a free press" were not banned — strike actions were briefly made illegal but this wasn't actually "his" decision he pushed against it. The Cuban revolution is not "Fidel's" it belongs to the Cuban peopleTags: Mobile editMobile web edit
05:4105:41, 20 March 2019diffhist+15
Caribbean
Nicaragua is also Caribbean. Culturally we are Caribbean, we are historically tied to Caribbean politics (Grenada, Haiti, Cuba, Puerto Rico, Union Island, Jamaica). Nicaragua is part of (currently leading) ACS and CARICOM. Constitution declares Nicaragua a Caribbean country as of 2015.Tags: Mobile editMobile web edit
8 March 2019
01:1401:14, 8 March 2019diffhist+428
Douma chemical attack
According to OPCW, sarin was not used. That's worth mentioning in the part that claims sarin was used, I would think.Tags: Mobile editMobile web edit
21:5821:58, 27 February 2019diffhist+1,753
Sandinista National Liberation Front
that article does not say that the FSLN is democratic socialist; it calls it social-democratic, though this isn't really accurate. replaced that with marxism-leninism, because that's significantly more accurate (Sandinismo is essentially Marxism-Leninism, Liberation Theology, and Sandino's teachings converged), remove wrong/unsourced "left wing populism"
03:5603:56, 6 February 2019diffhist−575
Roger Waters
→Activism: whether Venezuela is "free" or not is irrelevant to this article. What various think tanks have to say about Bolsonaro is not mentioned for precisely the same reason, which is correct for the scope of this article. It is slanting the article in a particular political direction by inclusion of certain claims and exclusion of others.
5 February 2019
01:4401:44, 5 February 2019diffhist+1
Roger Waters
→Activism: Unnecessarily polemic, Wikipedia is not a political soapbox ("authoritarian regime" is not a neutral term, and like with his criticism of Bolsonaro or support of BDS he has received praise and criticism from different sections of society)Tags: Mobile editMobile web edit
03:0403:04, 23 May 2018diffhist+53
m
2018 Venezuelan presidential election
is this better? the phrasing used on the Financial Times article is used. "NATO-aligned" changed to "U.S. Government and NATO affiliated" since its board of directors are largely US and NATO representatives (in other words they are "independent" of one another but it is objectively an
interlocking directorate)
02:2202:22, 23 May 2018diffhist+23
m
2018 Venezuelan presidential election
change "some analysts" to "Neoliberal and NATO-aligned analysts" because this is a political topic where political background of sources is important and the two sources provided are described on Wikipedia as being neoliberal (Financial Times) and aligned with NATO (Atlantic Council)