Talk:Venezuelan crisis of 1895

Start of the special relationship?
I was under the impression that some scholars believe this crisis to be the start of the British-American "Special Relationship". That is not reflected in the article though. Is there anything in the literature about this? --Airborne84 (talk) 03:05, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
 * I didn't come across any references to the Special Relationship in writing the article, but in writing a history of that, this episode would be significant. I can certainly see why it's quite likely that some think it's the start. Rd232 talk 08:54, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

Only U.S. / British point of view?
This article is good in general, but still has some mistakes and inaccuracies. I think the most important problem here is that virtually no sources in Spanish have been used. In order to clarify a matter like this, it's essencial to take into account the spanish/venezuelan point of view by considering what their diplomats and experts have said. The article is mainly based in opinions and research made by British or U.S. authors, thus it seems to tackle the problem only with a bilateral perspective, which leads to serious failures. For instance, the article states that Venezuela abided by the arbitral award, and this is not true in fact, because although Venezuela sent commissioners in order to verify the process of placing the milestones, it rejected the outcome of the award from the beginning. --Hiddendaemian (talk) 12:26, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

Aftermath
The existing link to Severo Mallet-Prevost is really to a promotional article about a law firm that he joined well after the time of his involvement in the arbitration. A link to something about the person would be far more interesting. Eclecticology (talk) 23:36, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

Requested moves

 * The following discussion is an archived 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. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: moved. Jenks24 (talk) 13:42, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

– The adjectival form is more popular: see this Ngram. The lower case form is also more popular, although I don't mind if we keep a capital C in crisis. Srnec (talk) 22:39, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Venezuela Crisis of 1895 → Venezuelan crisis of 1895
 * Venezuela Crisis of 1902–03 → Venezuelan crisis of 1902–03
 * Venezuela Crisis → Venezuelan crisis


 * Support per nom. Dicklyon (talk) 04:41, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Support per nom. Tony   (talk)  09:37, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Support per nom. Egsan Bacon (talk) 14:49, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

GA criteria issues
The article does not cite sources for all the content in the article, as required by the GA criteria. (t &#183; c)  buidhe  05:41, 29 July 2023 (UTC)