Talk:Peruvian protests (2022–2023)

Feedback from New Page Review process

I left the following feedback for the creator/future reviewers while reviewing this article: Thanks for creating the article!.

✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 14:23, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

Inclusion of trade unions in parties

Given how the article discusses the role of various unions and federations in supporting Castillo in these protests, I think they should be included.

Also, why are the ethnocacerists included when the article explains that their support was pretty middling and they were literally booed of stage by protestors? Genabab (talk) 10:53, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Yeah, reading the source and it seems to say that the ethocacerists are more Pro-Boluarte than anything else. If anything they should be on the other end of the parties to the conflict. Genabab (talk) 10:58, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

@Genabab: they appear to changed their mind [1] Braganza (talk) 15:54, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Indeed. Perhaps they should be added again and this accident (for lack of a better term) be made clear in the article’s body that they accidentally supported Boluarte, kinda. Genabab (talk) 18:00, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Low importance article

This doesn’t seem very low importance, given the extent of Pro-Castillo protests and opposition to Boluarte and Congress. perhaps this could be changed to be slightly more significant Genabab (talk) 10:19, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

• Upgraded rating per your feedback. - Indefensible (talk) 18:02, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for speedy deletion:

• December 2022 Peruvian protests December 8 clash.png
• December 2022 Peruvian protests December 8 gathering.png

You can see the reasons for deletion at the file description pages linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 12:23, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion

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

• December 2022 Peruvian protests December 8 clash.png (discussion)
• December 2022 Peruvian protests December 8 gathering.png (discussion)

Participate in the deletion discussions at the nomination pages linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 20:38, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

huh?

i can't make any sense out of this sentence in the lead-- In some localities, the protests showed a position of rejection towards congressmen from their departments that they represent for allowing the vacancy motion for Castillo. Potholehotline (talk) 00:35, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Title/move

I see that User:WMrapids moved this article on December 26, was there any discussion on this? It no longer matches the Spanish article which is using the old title. 2022 Peruvian economic protests was also moved but not sure that was correct either. - Indefensible (talk) 22:47, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

@Indefensible: The major factor for the first protests in 2022 were the economic issues, not so much political. The late 2022 protests are obviously political in nature and will most likely span past December 2022.--WMrapids (talk) 04:47, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

I think you should have waited for a discussion before moving the articles though. 2022 Peruvian economic protests's opening sentence is "Mass protests in Peru against inflation and President Pedro Castillo's government began in March 2022." That does not seem just economic. Date range given is also only a short period of time in March-April, by calling both "2022" it sounds like they are overlapping. - Indefensible (talk) 21:07, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

The current title of unrest is even better, because this is not limited to protests. The death toll is over 60 & includes massacres in Ayacucho & Juliaca. Jim Michael 2 (talk) 13:07, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

Timeline put into separate page

I propose that the Timeline section is moved to a new page "Timeline of the Peruvian protests" -- similar to what was done with the Mahsa Amini protests page. The timeline section is already too long. Geopony (talk) 11:25, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Agree, the timeline as is with more than a dozen sections is gross and unencyclopedic. Jtbobwaysf (talk) 09:34, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

@Geopony: @Jtbobwaysf: I will summarize the timeline sections by month in this article and place the detailed information in a separate timeline article.--WMrapids (talk) 19:03, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

Changed name?

Someone changed the name with even a discussion. Should we do something about this? ☭MasterWolf-Æthelwulf☭ (=^._.^= ∫) 19:45, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

MasterWolf0928-Æthelwulf I don't usually do this, but I've reverted it as the user who made the move seems to be inexperienced and has moved several other protest/riot articles without discussion. - ZLEA _T\^C 23:04, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

Neutrality

Sock

Los artículos dedicados al tema hablan mucho de los actos realizados por el Estado peruano pero muy poco de los realizados por los "manifestantes". Además, en la sección de antecedentes nunca se mencionan las vinculaciones que tenía el partido de Pedro Castillo con el MOVADEF, cosa probada en diversas investigaciones y que fue una de las razones detrás del impeachment. Y eso por no hablar del asalto a aeropuertos y demás cosas que sucedieron por esas fechas. Armando AZ (talk) 07:50, 16 March 2023 (UTC) I translate for those who do not speak Spanish. The articles dedicated to the subject talk a lot about the acts carried out by the Peruvian State but very little about those carried out by the "protesters". In addition, the background section never mentions the links that Pedro Castillo's party had with MOVADEF, something proven in various investigations and which was one of the reasons behind the impeachment. And that's not to mention the assault on airports and other things that happened around those dates. Armando AZ (talk) 15:54, 16 March 2023 (UTC) Another thing that I forgot to add is Bolivia's involvement in the conflict, which the last time I read the article there was no mention of it. Armando AZ (talk) 18:27, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Biased in favor of pro-Castillo forces

The article is clearly positioned against the Boluarte government and in favor of the protesters, omitting information that leaves them in a bad light. Compare it with the article in Spanish. 2801:15:8004:4E:643C:9B31:215E:C032 (talk) 16:11, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

Leaked CIA document

A recent edit added an alleged leaked CIA document to this article. While I have some doubts about the authenticity of this document (but to be fair, I've never seen a real CIA document to compare), I do not believe this is something to take lightly. Is there a procedure for dealing with and reporting leaks of classified US Government documents? - ZLEA _T\^C 18:14, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

I've removed it. This clearly isn't an authentic government document; among other tip-offs, the heading "CONFIDENTIAL AND TOP SECRET" is a contradiction in terms. ("Confidential" and "top secret" are two different levels of classification, and would never both appear on the same document.) Omphalographer (talk) 22:23, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

I knew something was off about it. Thanks for removing it. - ZLEA _T\^C 01:21, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

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:

• CIA World Activities.pdf

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 21:24, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

Linking protesters with paramilitary groups in Bolivia.

Someone added less than a month ago the following: "Even so, local and international media reported on the transfer of weapons from the Bolivian border to southern Peru (in the Puno's region), focusing mainly on the so-called "dum dum bullets", ilegal artifacts capable of causing greater damage than a normal bullet and that have been found among groups of "ponchos rojos" crossing the border, as also indicated by the Bolivian deputy Erwin Bazán. The Peruvian police do not use bullets of this type and the Directorate Against Terrorism (Dircote) has said that investigations are still ongoing. The Peruvian government's endorsement of these claims has caused new tensions between the two countries." The sources used were from reliable media, including the BBC in Spanish. I think some of that information should be added, since this article is getting out of date. 2801:15:8004:10:9CA0:F3C9:238A:3EB6 (talk) 16:47, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

Origins of the protests

What is the following statement supposed to convey?

The demonstrations lack centralized leadership and originated primarily among grassroots movements and social organizations [...]

It feels wrong, but I can't quite put my finger on it. Shouldn't the protests have originated from, you know, people? I doubt that a grassroots movement or social organisation could mobilise its supporters to create these protests, as that would require leadership, which would disqualify them from being "grassroots". It would make much more sense for the statement to be worded as:

The demonstrations lacked centralized leadership and originated primarily from among supporters of certain grassroots movements. Some social organisations have expressed sympathies.

Though this is vague. Which grassroots movements? Are we trying to say that any single protester was part of one grassroots movement or another? Is the fact that most protestors took part in movements really notable if you can't name a specific movement?

And wasn't the primary origin of the protests Pedro Castillo supporters? Why are we stealing credit from them and giving it to unnamed movements?

What is even being said here? Do any sources support it? I can't read Spanish. Dieknon (talk) 22:36, 14 February 2024 (UTC)