Talk:Eduardo López Bustamante

Peacock and POV tags
Could you please review WP:PEACOCK and make the necessary changes. In general, the article is written with far too laudatory a style, and it is not impartial and encyclopedic in tone. In particular, the following look like WP:PEACOCK wording that should be changed: These are not the only examples but some obvious ones.
 * They made up a very important Venezuelan team of journalists
 * In his book about distinguished lawyers of Zulia state, writer Gastón Montiel mentions a famous article written by Eduardo López Bustamante.
 * López Bustamante was higly respected by all the people of Zulia state.
 * Section title "Outstanding lawyer"

There are also serious POV problems, like this paragraph:
 * From 1908, the newspaper began to suffer repression and censorship from the newly instated government of dictator Juan Vicente Gómez. General Gómez, who assumed power the same year that López Bustamante took over El Fonógrafo, led one of the longest and fiercest dictatorships in Latin America. As explained by the writer José Rafael Pocaterra, in his book Memorias de un Venezolano de la decadencia (Memoirs of a Venezuelan in decline), the López Bustamante family did not escape this tyranny, which was far more brutal than all previous ones. The previous despotic regimes, writes Pocaterra, had respected that newspaper, whose material progress was a result of its enormous moral responsibility.

15:10, 7 August 2012 (UTC)


 * I took a look at the article again tonight and it's a huge improvement, fine work. It's not perfect, but much better.  I am removing the POV tag.    00:59, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

Books/references
Keep in mind that the information comes from books an authors´ words. What is written is what authors wrote. I understand what you mean and I did my best in the sentences you mention, but it´s not possible to disregard the information provided by the text in the books. When the translation is finifhed the citations will be in place. That will probably change your perception. Morover, some citations are copied exactly from book texts and in italics. Is not that simple. Waiting to hear more from you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.89.96.233 (talk) 16:02, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
 * I agree with Zad68 re the skewed perspective of some aspects of the article. Although individual sources may support the material, wikipedia should nevertheless be as neutral as possible. As we continue to translate from the original Spanish and are able to see the entire article in perspective then adjustments can be made later with the wording of the content and, of course, removal of some of the contentious areas. I'll work with you on whatever improvements I can.EagerToddler39 (talk) 20:33, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

I think we have to locate the citations because Wikipedia writes: "unless you can cite independent sources that support the characterization". The page has a complete book source and EVERYTHING in the article comes from those books. I cannot change, for ex. the fact that a book mentioned is "Distinguish lawyers of Zulia State". Distinguished is the word used and there is nothing I can do. I cannot change the fact that authors words have a "promoting" style, if it is so. What can we do? The article is already translated, isn´t it?--213.89.96.233 (talk) 21:17, 7 August 2012 (UTC)