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 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
A good source for the 'Background' section, but I can't figure out how to integrate into article:
(12 Sep. 1892) – THE CIVIL WAR IN VENEZUELA. MOLESTATION OF MERCHANTS AND EUROPEAN CONSULS. The Sydney Morning Herald; Wednesday 14 September 1892, :
p. 7
@
MiguelMadeira: Kind regards. Do you mean the current phrasing of after President Cipriano Castro refused to pay foreign debts and damages suffered by European citizens in recent Venezuelan civil wars? I know this reply comes years later, but the civil war in question should be the
Liberating Revolution (Venezuela), which was the one related to the debts of this conflict. --
NoonIcarus (
talk)
11:20, 12 December 2023 (UTC)reply
The following is a closed discussion of a
requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a
move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Oppose. I see lots more results for "Venezuelan crisis" than "Venezuelan blockade" in reference to the 1902–1903 events. There was a blockade, but the crisis was broader than that.
Srnec (
talk)
14:23, 12 December 2023 (UTC)reply
Support. Much more precise for such a small change. This crisis was central about the blockade. Venezuela has had many crises. Blockade is a better word for the title.
SmokeyJoe (
talk)
01:01, 30 December 2023 (UTC)reply
"Venezuelan blockade" is ambiguous. Was Venezuela blockading or blockaded? If you Google "German blockade", you will see that the
blockade of Germany is not usually intended. In fact, the top hit I get at Google Books is "German blockade of Venezuela". If the title must have "blockade", then it should be "blockade of Venezuela".
Srnec (
talk)
05:13, 30 December 2023 (UTC)reply
I think “blockade†is better word choice than “crisisâ€. The references and further reading feature examples of “Venezuela blockade†with disambiguation by date range. I don’t find it ambiguous, thinking it normal that Germans may blockade as well as be blockades, but don’t think it likely that Venezuela would blockade another nation. However, it you think it’s ambiguous, suggest something better.
I take your point about the crisis being more than a blockade, involving debts and coercion, and haven’t decided my opinion on that question.
SmokeyJoe (
talk)
08:57, 30 December 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose: "Venezuelan blockade" is not the common name (
[1][2]/
[3][4]/
[5][6]) and, per Srnec, nor precise. It was seemingly only more popular at the time (1 January 1902–31 December 1903) with NewspaperArchive.com returning 17,188 results against "Venezuelan crisis"'s 6,056. However, literature, being more reliable and contemporary, takes precedence. Additionally, "blockade of Venezuela" does return more results compared to "Venezuelan blockade"
[7][8][9].
XxTechnicianxX (
talk)
07:30, 30 December 2023 (UTC)reply
As Ngrams surveys Google Books, there is a
WP:RS concern. Per
WP:NAMECHANGES, if "Venezuelan blockade" was more popular until the 1960s but was supplanted by "Venezuelan crisis", then the latter is more appropriate. "Venezuelan crisis" is vague, but in relation to 1902–1903 events, it is the common name. "Venezuelan crisis of 1902–1903" integrates such whilst clarifying enough for navigation. Per
WP:NCWWW, it satisfies most parameters and, as primary adherence is to WP:COMMONNAME, does not need further clarification. Per WP:COMMONNAME and
WP:ESTABLISHED, the Polar Foundation and Arráiz Lucca are irrelevant; only English-language works can be considered as there is sufficient coverage. Rather than change the title, I suggest redirect(s) "Venezuelan blockade"/"blockade of Venezuela/"1902–1903 blockade of Venezuela"/"1902–1903 Venezuelan blockade" be made.
XxTechnicianxX (
talk)
19:00, 4 January 2024 (UTC)reply
Move back to
Venezuelan crisis of 1902–03. Concur with those above indicating that the "crisis" moniker is the common name. However, the bold 2018 move from 1902–03 to 1902–1903 IMHO shouldn't have been made.
MOS:DATERANGE allows for two-digit years as the second of two consecutive years, and it looks more concise and clearer (particularly giving readers the immediate clue that it was over a few months, not over a period of multiple years) when presented the original shorter way.  —Â
Amakuru (
talk)
23:49, 10 January 2024 (UTC)reply
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.