This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Augusto Pinochet article. This is
not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
The subject of this article is
controversial and content may be in
dispute. When updating the article,
be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a
neutral point of view. Include
citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to
join the project and
contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the
documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of
WikiProject Cold War, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Cold WarWikipedia:WikiProject Cold WarTemplate:WikiProject Cold WarCold War articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chile, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Chile 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.ChileWikipedia:WikiProject ChileTemplate:WikiProject ChileChile articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Basque, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Basque people,
Basque Country,
Basque language, history and culture 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.BasqueWikipedia:WikiProject BasqueTemplate:WikiProject BasqueBasque articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Latin America, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to
Latin America 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.Latin AmericaWikipedia:WikiProject Latin AmericaTemplate:WikiProject Latin AmericaLatin America articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
politics 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.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
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 articles
This sentence in the introduction is garbled:
"According to the Chilean government, the number of executions and forced disappearances was 3,095.[20]"
So was it 3,095.executions? Or 3,095 disappearances? Or 1 execution and 3,094 disappearances? Or, 3,094 executions and 1 disappearance?
Citations for "dictator" in lead
AFAIK, "dictator" is the scholarly consensus, and should remain in the lead. But we should cite historians. Not news organization, not the "Journal of Design History", not the "Inquiries Journal" (written by undergrads), not a news article attributing use of the adjective to George W. Bush, and not an NSA book (primary source).
The point of citations isn't so editors can defend themselves from accusations of bias ("I'm not saying it, WaPo did!").
It's to give readers a starting point from which to learn more about a subject. For this specific phrase in the lead, we should use exclusively scholarly sources (historians), published by scholarly publishers (not "pop history") of which there are plenty. We don't really care that Reuters thinks Pinochet is a dictator; what matters is that historians think that.
DFlhb (
talk) 11:59, 8 November 2022 (UTC)reply
You put label "dictator" in the lead for Pinochet and I invite you to put label "dictator" in the lead for
Jiang Zemin.
Forza bruta (
talk) 00:49, 7 December 2022 (UTC)reply
I've never edited this article or its lead.
DFlhb (
talk) 01:07, 7 December 2022 (UTC)reply
That'd just show you have no idea how the chinese government works
Orocairion (
talk) 13:05, 7 March 2024 (UTC)reply
You in previous comment support the presence of "dictator" in lead.
Forza bruta (
talk) 01:19, 7 December 2022 (UTC)reply
I support it as long as it’s cited to scholarly sources. I don’t think news orgs are a sufficient source for this type of claim about a well-researched historical figure.
DFlhb (
talk) 11:49, 7 December 2022 (UTC)reply
Section's wrong title
Section's title ACCUSATIONS OF FASCISM is wrong because fascism is an ideology founded on economic system named CORPORATIVISMO in Italian language: some Italians were inventors of fascist ideology which have several imitations in all the world. Pinochet ruled his nation in similar manner of Mussolini, Franco, Salazar, Peron, etc. but Pinochet did not inserted economic corporativismo in totally manner: for these reason I suggest title COMPARISON WITH FASCISM.
Forza bruta (
talk) 01:16, 7 December 2022 (UTC)reply
Your premise is incorrect. Corporatism was a much broader economic phenomenon in post-WWI Europe. Fascism's early emphasis on corporatism wasn't at all unique, and the fascist movement later transcended any and all economic doctrines. Anyone who would like to read a classic bit of scholarship on the topic should check out
Charles Maier's Recasting Bourgeois EuropeGeneralrelative (
talk) 18:59, 7 December 2022 (UTC)reply
I added a link to
Thatcherism, which I think is most relevant. –
CWenger (
^ •
@) 23:18, 11 December 2022 (UTC)reply
Neoliberal?!
I’m not a big fan of neoliberalism, but isn’t it a little insulting to connect it to a murderous fascist dictator, just because he took the advice of free market economists?
Island Pelican (
talk) 20:22, 28 July 2023 (UTC)reply
His economic lean is somewhat at a tangent to the question. Capitalism and Hitler, Communism had Stalin and Mao, all economic doctrines have produced monsters.
103.94.51.49 (
talk) 08:47, 31 January 2024 (UTC)reply
Not really, as the implementation of neoliberal policies was part of the conditions and goals to get support from the US in his coup.
Orocairion (
talk) 13:10, 7 March 2024 (UTC)reply
About my edit and its arbitrary removal
Hi, after hours of work my edit was in a matter of seconds removed without discussion or proper argumentation.
In my post I only expanded what was already there in regards to the economic policy which is my area of interest I removed nothing, my edit consisted of adding more data, dates and properly referencing the Laws of Chile in question, and connecting ideas that were not properly connected.
Therefore I please ask for the restoration of my edit, my references were the Congress Library, the World Bank and Mainstream Media therefore no one can claim I used questionable sources, and because all of it is just economic data it cannot be accused of being something else than numbers.
A good part of the text you added into the Pinochet article is written in some biased terms. I don't mind some of the text getting readded in due course, given that it provides appropriate context; my problem is with the manner you present the topics. For example: "economic liberalization under the leadership of Minister
Hernán Büchi" replaces "privatization". "poverty had fallen from 50% in 1975 when the reforms began to 38% in 1990 when Pinochet left power" <-- these percentages are not comparable, even current right-wing economists from Chile disregard such comparations. "in response to growing inequality in the country which can be traced back to the neoliberal policies of the Pinochet dictatorship." <-- you removed that appropriately referenced phrasing; refbombing won't help (you did so); and then you added a phrase to justify such changes which is just laughable (and taken from a piece of opinion) "Chile has historically been an unequal country since its foundation in 1541". I can't stand such changes.
Bedivere (
talk) 00:40, 28 August 2023 (UTC)reply
I don't mind the text being rewritten using other words, for example preferring "privatization" although I changed it because economic liberalization is more encompassing, privatization is just part of economic liberalization, it was not a random rewording especially considering that the article then proceeds to talk about the lowering of tariffs, that is economic liberalism not privatization.
Second, those percentages are actually comparable because they were both done according to the old system instead of the new system in use by CASEN since the early 2000's, and that data was already in the article I did not add it, I just reworded it.
"even current right-wing economists" this is not a left vs right, this is numbers.
Third, you can keep the last point if you want, but restore everything else.
Although it is a factual error economic as data by the World Bank and others supports that income inequality has fallen, that is not opinion it is DATA, what I changed then was a factual error which claims that inequality is rising when the numbers show otherwise, I do not deny that Chile is a highly unequal country, that is why I said it is very unequal for OECD standards, Chile has also been historically unequal you can't deny it.
Let me elaborate my point. I don't mind that you add relevant content. My problem is with the unclear context and inappropriate wording. If you can make a suggestion here so we can have a consensus, I'd be all up for that.
Bedivere (
talk) 02:08, 28 August 2023 (UTC)reply
As I said before I have absolutely no issue with adding a completely different wording and I would greatly appreciate if you could help me in some way or another. How can I leave a suggestion? Like a draft.
Nachowski1809 (
talk) 19:48, 29 August 2023 (UTC)reply
You could propose alternative wordings for some of the phrases I've suggested before. I hope we can reach a consensus rapidly so that your content gets reinstated. soon.
Bedivere (
talk) 16:56, 30 August 2023 (UTC)reply
Sorry for not doing so earlier I have been quite busy! Where should I propose the wording? here? I do not want to do an edit without previous approval by others
Nachowski1809 (
talk) 18:01, 15 September 2023 (UTC)reply