Talk:Baram Dam

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Neutrality[edit]

The addition of a protest chronology in this article has given it undue weight on the side of opposition. Roughly 80 percent of the article, after "The dam will be 162 metres (531 ft) tall and its reservoir will cover an area of 39,000 hectares (96,000 acres)." covers controversy and protests. I don't think a chronology of protests is appropriate and much of that section should be removed or summarized. Controversial dams, such as Belo Monte Dam, have significant protest information intertwined occasionally with the negative impacts. The article does not cover the dam's impacts aside from the power it will produce and the number of people it will displace. I can help add information on the background and history of the dam as well as cleaning up the protest section. For example, the when the dam's feasibility study was completed is more important than a single routine protest.--NortyNort (Holla) 02:54, 4 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your comment. Protests on the proposed Baram dam should definitely be included in this article because most of the newspaper articles that I found focused on the demonstrations, protests, and blockades against the dam. Besides, the protests started since the year 2012 and it is still ongoing to this day and has complicated the efforts of authorities to build the dam. I have summarised the protest section and included new information about the status of Baram dam. You are welcome to contribute any other information pertinent to the dam including views that advocate the construction of the dam. Regards.Cerevisae (talk) 07:53, 4 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I can't find much other information on the dam because the web is so flooded with protest material. I don't doubt protests are a significant portion but there is more to 'the story' and the article just needs to be weighted better. I will do some research later and add some basic background information. I am no dam advocate necessarily but I see too many dam articles on Wikipedia turn into activism pages. Thanks--NortyNort (Holla) 13:57, 4 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I did some work on adding background and with the flow. I tried to intertwine the protesting into the displacement section. Belo Monte Dam, for example, had an enormous amount of protesting. James Cameron even made a short film to oppose it. Much of that was summarized and placed throughout the article. I think the road blockade is the most notable portion of the protests. There isn't much out there on the dam aside from the protests because it seems the government is being quiet about the details which is typical. This dam is also in the early stages, there isn't much of an international argument about it. I don't even see the government arguing much for it. Maybe some more information will surface in the coming months and years.--NortyNort (Holla) 20:48, 4 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your input.Cerevisae (talk) 21:51, 4 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Baram Dam. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:06, 25 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Baram Dam. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:24, 14 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Baram_Dam&oldid=1199499735"