Open main menu

Talk:2019 Chilean protests


Hello from Chile! Shit is unfolding right in front of my eyes. I added a longer opening paragraph and some sources; I began with the ENEL HQ fire last night. Will add sources as I find them. Please leave your comments here. Thank you! -- (talk) 16:04, 19 October 2019 (UTC) Found Instagram media of the supposed casualty: (WARNING: blood) Removing statement for now as I can't find a source in notable media. -- (talk) 16:07, 19 October 2019 (UTC)

As it stands now this article does NOT have a neutral point of view or at least present both sides. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Johncobin (talkcontribs) 02:03, 26 October 2019 (UTC)

Article name change to "October 2019 Chilean Riots/Protests"Edit

The main focus of media and other attention is not on the peaceful protests, rather on the violent Riots and looting that started in Santiago but have since spread to many cities across the country (Especially Valparaiso, where they have been burning down metro stations like Santiago). It would be a more accurate name for the article.

PS, I really hope this all ends soon, stay safe if you're down there! — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 00:36, 20 October 2019 (UTC)

Thank you! I live a couple blocks down from Baquedano Square in Santiago-that's the most media-visible "warzone" down here. People stopping AFVs like Tiannamen, staring down fully armed troops. Then again, half the grunts down there looked real uncomfortable. The city's gone full Joker, man. They're burning supermarkets, the whole metro is disabled, no bus transit, curfew enforced by the military, and everybody and their mother is out there stirring shit, even in the wealthy suburbs. Really, they want Piñera's head on a plate. And it's not just in the capital -- there's been uprisings in the north and south, too. -- (talk) 02:03, 20 October 2019 (UTC)

I also currently in Valparaiso and protests are pretty heavy and serious here as well and the region of Valparaiso has been under the state of emergency and curfews since Saturday. I have a number of photos that I am happy to share if helpful. But I also agree that this seems to be beyond Santiago, and much larger in the country. Rostaf (talk) 14:10, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

Requested move 20 October 2019Edit

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.

The result of the move request was: snow moved. With a preference ratio of nearly 10:1, I don't think we need to wait the full 7 days. But a new move request is permitted to be launched sooner rather than later to offset this expediency El_C 21:50, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

2019 Santiago protests2019 Chilean protests – Protests and riots have expanded and don't include only the capital. B1mbo (talk) 02:19, 20 October 2019 (UTC)

  • Support for the same reason. The Spanish article is also for Chile rather than only Santiago. Jim Michael (talk) 04:11, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Support' merge as the title more correctly reflects the broad scope of the protests outside of and including in of Santiago.Ndołkah (talk) 05:02, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Support as per above. MSG17 (talk) 12:34, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Support as protests are ongoing in, at least, three cities. --MarioGom (talk) 15:19, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
This doesn't need an RM - no-one's opposing this move. Jim Michael (talk) 15:35, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
With that reasoning, the 2011 England riots should be at 2011 London riots. Jim Michael (talk) 20:39, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
I perceive the proposed WP:MOVE as purposeless. Beyond that I perceive it as inflammatory. I think it constitutes exaggeration. A common name exists—the Santiago protests. Even if you were to expand the article's content to cover geographical locations outside of Santiago, the current title would still suffice. Does anyone not know Santiago is the capital of Chile? Bus stop (talk) 21:16, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
There are many other Santiagos. A bigger issue is that the protests have extended way beyond Santiago, so having Santiago rather than Chile in the title means that it doesn't cover the scope of the protests or our article about them. Jim Michael (talk) 21:52, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Strong Support: Most sources use "Chile protest" or "Protest in Chilean capital" or a variation of these. Few sources mention Santiago by name. Even in the above oppose vote, one source starts with "Chile protests". TryKid (talk) 18:40, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
I will remove the template, as reasoned in the following section. --Jorge (talk) 19:47, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
Should and riots be added to the (proposed) title? Calling them mere protests is euphemistic since they've escalated into looting, arson & killing. Jim Michael (talk) 20:39, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
Jim Michael: I don't think so. Riots is often a contentious label and sources are usually split on its usage. There were recent discussions about this on 2019 Hong Kong protests, where arson and other violent actions took place, but reliable sources were not really supporting such primary name. I think it is the same case here. We can always reconsider this, but only if there is clear support from reliable sources. --MarioGom (talk) 21:00, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Indifference – The situation is still in flux, there's talk of a general strike tomorrow, the situation is still far from settled. It's acquiring national dimensions, but the article's focus is still largely on the capital. Also aware that arguing about the location of the article is so much easier than improving it. Moscow Mule (talk) 20:55, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Support Most sources (see BBC News for example) now seem to be prefacing their articles with 'Chile protests' or similar. Sam Walton (talk) 11:31, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Support it's clearly not just Santiago Mujinga (talk) 19:21, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Support, there are acts of protest and violence across Chile. The fact that most protest happen in Santiago and that it originated there, does not change the fact this is a natiowide phenomenom. Said this, the article title should be reviewed again in the future. Dentren | Talk 19:23, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Support, First of all "Santiago" suggest Chilean POV, there are many cities in the Hispanic world called Santiago, Spanish speaking people outside of Chile would say "Santiago de Chile" unless the context is clear. Additionally, there have been protests in many other Chilean cities, and the article itself is already mentioning it. I had about 33 million google hits for "2019 Santiago protests" VS 115 million for "2019 Chile protests" JRSP (talk) 21:48, 21 October 2019 (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.

Moved to "2019 Chile crisis"Edit

I have moved the page to that title. I'm sure everyone will understand this as it has been acknowledged as the worst crisis since 1990 by the President of the Senate. --Jorge (talk) 19:45, 20 October 2019 (UTC)

I have reverted the move. There is an ongoing discussion about it above, feel free to add your proposal there. --MarioGom (talk) 20:07, 20 October 2019 (UTC)


What is the main cause to called an article as Protest or Riots as in December 2001 riots in Argentina — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 14:14, 23 October 2019 (UTC)

Starting when?Edit

The lead doesn't say. The article has "The protests began on Monday, 7 October..." (but not sure whether the cite confirms that). Infobox has "Date: 14 October 2019 - ongoing". Perhaps regular editors would kindly agree what the sources support - and then also replace the un-encyclopaedic lead opening "Civil protests are taking place ...." Davidships (talk) 14:59, 23 October 2019 (UTC)

Edit request, 23 October 2019Edit

Hi! :), shouldn't among the "goals" be "Resignation of President Sebastián Piñera"?, It's double-sourced sourced in the Spanish Wiki :). Love & Peace :) --CoryGlee (talk) 16:14, 23 October 2019 (UTC)

I already added it Jasdez (talk) 08:48, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
I already added it Jasdez (talk) 08:48, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

Number of people Dead, Injured and ArrestedEdit

On the third paragraph of the article, it says that there are 18 people dead, 2.500 injured and 5.000 arrested, but the CBS article that is used as a source does not mention where the information came from. If you ask me, this does not counts as a reliable source.

Can we please use reliable sources for this kind of information? A good place to start is the National Institute of Human Rights ( and their daily Twitter reports ( --Justalemon (talk) 21:23, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

Request for limitng editing rightsEdit

hello, i have noticed that there is constantly point-of-view editing (sometimes hardly sourced) on political issues regarding the protests specifically, and chile's political system in general by different ip-adresses (hence people that don't own a wiki-account). could we somehow limit the editing rights to not-new-users? at least for the moment. things seem to heat up pretty much and this could be a way to limit edit-wars and a possible war over opinion through wikipedia. thanks and greetings, --LH7605 (talk) 21:52, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

I would like to know who keeps deleting my edits andy why? What is the point of putting a one-sided narrative with largely non-academic source writers? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Johncobin (talkcontribs) 02:02, 26 October 2019 (UTC)

I reverted your edits because they are highly provocative and POV, and often contain no sources whatsoever. As far as I can tell, you appear to be an WP:SPA here to push an agenda. Additions such as this, especially without citations, are unacceptable: "Augusto Pinochet's military administration ousted Chile's communist regime and set Chile on a course of being the most properous country in Latin America, dramatically reducing poverty."--C.J. Griffin (talk) 03:07, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
I again reverted your additions because they constitute WP:OR and blatantly violate WP:NPOV. Placing such provocative materials in the lede in particular only serves to trigger reverts and edit conflicts. Please refrain from adding such material.--C.J. Griffin (talk) 04:06, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
Johncobin, you have violated the WP:3RR rule with your persistent edit warring, and continue to add wildly undue material with no citations, and change material for which cited sources exist. For example, You keep changing the number of arrested to 2840, even though the cited source (CBS News) says the number is "some 5,000". And again you reinserted the above quotation about the Pinochet regime without any citation with this edit, which is unbelievably unencyclopedic and biased.--C.J. Griffin (talk) 04:45, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
I've made a request at RfPP. I just warned the user about 3RR, so an AN3 report might be a bit premature. El_C 04:51, 26 October 2019 (UTC)

I have carefully cited what I stated in the text. Cite about Vallejo and Cariola 80 metro stations damaged source the 81st is here and also here The August 23 declaration is at also About poverty rates About the FPMR and bombings About the attempt to impeach Piñera About the million protesters — Preceding unsigned comment added by Johncobin (talkcontribs) 05:03, 26 October 2019 (UTC)

I have reverted a lot of single-point-of-view edits aswell (not sure if they were from you). As I see it, we can put a sub-chapter named Reactions to the protests (or some similar name) into the article where we can gather positive and negative reactions, support and refusal for the protesters' goals. But I reverted changes that were far off and way beyond single critics, such as the conspirency theory that the Foro de Sao Paulo was acting as the main force behind the protests (not proven at all), that Piñera was centre-left (combined with other dubious usage of left-right-evaluations) und comments about Allende/Pinochet when they were not relevant at all. Stated this some times also in the comments to my "undo"-edits. I think it should be clear, that/why these coments are missplaced in this article. edit: Besides that, constantly naming earned university degrees in order to appear more credible and to appear as some kind of authority is realy not how this works... --LH7605 (talk) 06:57, 26 October 2019 (UTC)

@Johncobin: I have noticed you have claimed several times that you have a PhD and live in Chile to justify changes. I'd like to inform you that this doesn't mean anything at all as Wikipedia has no credential policy, and that does not make your changes more warranted or more important, so could you please refrain from further repetition of this statement. Thank you. BeŻet (talk) 13:15, 26 October 2019 (UTC) @BeŻet: Thank you for pointing that fact out. My purpose in stating that was point out that I am a qualified writer and I was being treated otherwise. Please note that the article as it stands contains many non-neutral and questionable "loaded" statements. Some things are not sourced well or cited, unlike my comments when are. Also, there are figures cited by news sources like CBS which contradict the Chilean press and Chilean news sources. So, even though there is a citation, it is inaccurate. The same is true for poverty and inequality. I cite a government source. Others cite information that is biased. Also, if we look at Gini figures, remember that Bolivia has a "better" Gini figure than Chile does, yet Chile's GDP per capit is triple that of Bolivia's and the poor there are far poorer than in Chile. There is also no question that Chilean poverty affected half the population under Allende and was reduced drastically under Pinochet, being as low as 4% in recent years. My statements are backed up by good sources. Why is my edit edit being deleted? It appears that there is bias on the part of other editors. The same is true for the motivation of the communist party reported in the press to carry on the class struggle in Chile through violence. Why do you refuse to note this as a reason? You even deleted references I made to support the number of metro stations damaged and the agreement and declaration of the Chilean House of Representatives in August 1973 asking the military to intervene and depose Allende. So what do you say? Are you willing to allow more cites and precise info?

May I remind you that this article is about the 2019 Chilean Protests and not about the 1973 Coup d'état? And to call other authors biased when not seeing (or admiting to) your own biases is pretty bold....besids that, you do not seem to be able to read neither the talk page carefully nor the edit-comments. The reasons why your edits were reedited are stated there more than once. I, for myself, will not feed the troll anymore. --LH7605 (talk) 15:19, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
I’m still under 3RR, so I’m asking that someone update the number of arrests in the last paragraph of the lede. The current number given, 2840, is not backed by either of the sources cited there.C.J. Griffin (talk) 17:35, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
The CBS-sources sais its "some 5,000". sounds a bit vague, doesn't it? --LH7605 (talk) 17:49, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
Perhaps, but even the other source gives a higher number than what is currently in the article.C.J. Griffin (talk) 17:52, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
La Tercera also gives 2,840 arrested people (see here). As I see it, there is no need for an update (yet). (won't undo it anyways, if some other person wants to change it, obviously). edit: just saw that it is from thursday. anywys, I prefere a stable, concrete, verified number from thursday over "some 5,000" information. Greetings, --LH7605 (talk) 17:59, 26 October 2019 (UTC)

"36% of the urban population live in extreme poverty"Edit

The statement "It is estimated that around 36% of the urban population live in extreme poverty." is hard to believe. Can we have more sources than an opinion piece at to back this up? Dentren | Talk 18:04, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

Agree that the number seems high. This reuters news states 11,7% of all Chileans living in extreme poverty. Even though the article is from 22 September 2016, I don't now how much it changed in the past three years. I also don't know, how they would define "urbane population" in the source / opinion piece at opendemocracy. Maybe Cepal has some answers to it? This study should provied answers, I personally currently don't have time / capacities to look further into it. --LH7605 (talk) 22:45, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

(I've originally included this information) While I don't find it hard to believe, I concur that an additional source would definitely help, and we should probably wait before including that information again. BeŻet (talk) 15:42, 1 November 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 29 October 2019Edit

Add updated of protests as of Monday October 28, 2019, in particular there were documented massive fires in the downtown of the city near La Moneda. Pepelani (talk) 01:21, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

  Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate.--Goldsztajn (talk) 12:08, 6 November 2019 (UTC)

Article is markedly slanted, hiding the monstruos extent of the unleashed vandalismEdit

As it is now, this article reeks of hypocrisy all over. Phrases like "Human rights organisations have received several reports of violations conducted against protesters". What about the savage, unjustified, destructive fury shown by vandals in abhorrent scenes, filmed by the hundreds and spread through social networks? Those are no "protesters", those are criminals! What about the Human Rights of the Metro commuters, now stranded after such modern & convenient resource has been utterly & wantonly destroyed by agents disguised as “enraged youngsters”? Also, the obvious simultaneity of savage attacks against the Metro cannot be casual, they can only be explained through investigations analyzing the links between this fabricated violence and the guidelines set forth by the Foro de São Paulo against Chilean Democracy. Attaching tag right away. AVM (talk) 00:18, 1 November 2019 (UTC)

First impression I got as well. Lots of unsubstantiated claims made,too. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 17:57, 10 November 2019 (UTC)
While there are qualifications that I don't share, I agree that it's important to stress the vandalism in the Santiago Metro, the looting of hypermarkets and claims of foreign interference, albeit properly attributed. Donald Trump has warned against foreign interference in the protests, and Venezuelan politicians have responsabilized Maduro's administration for the current unrest. --Jamez42 (talk) 12:09, 1 November 2019 (UTC)

I don't see the point of the tag, isn't it true that human rights organisations have received those reports? You came here and presented an extremely biased view of what's happening with some conspiracy theories included. We are presenting what reliable sources are saying, there is no slant. If you feel something is missing, include the content, but the tag is not justified by you presenting an extremely opinionated viewpoint. Removing tag for now. BeŻet (talk) 13:54, 1 November 2019 (UTC)

What happened to the infobox?Edit

Why does the infobox appear so thin? Is it the formatting or is this a special infobox? Lochglasgowstrathyre (talk) 14:13, 1 November 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 8 November 2019Edit

On: October protests sección, paragraph 7 says: Hours shortly after the President's speech, chief of national defense Javier Iturriaga del Campo spoke against this declaration, asserting that "[he] was calm" and that the country was not waging war against any group of citizens.

Hours shortly after the President's speech, chief of national defense Javier Iturriaga del Campo spoke against this declaration, asserting that "look, I'm a happy man, I'm truly, not in war with no body".

Will be a way better translation as keep the words and sentiment of: "mire, yo soy un hombre feliz, la verdad, no estoy en guerra con nadie", less textually could be "look, I'm a happy man, I'm ain't in no war with nobody" VeraSativa (talk) 01:14, 8 November 2019 (UTC)

  Partly done: Thanks. I think the literal translation would be "Look, I'm a happy man, the truth, I'm not at war with anyone." ("ain't" is far too informal here). However, in this context, I think content (as in contentment) is a better translation of feliz than happy - his intention is to express a view about whether he will take action - he is making a statement that he intends not to act... content conveys this better than happy.--Goldsztajn (talk) 22:18, 9 November 2019 (UTC)

Article heavily sided with power-abusive police against protestersEdit

I'm not a wikipedia editor but there have been several videos where police are shown setting fire to buildings[1][2], shooting people outside restricted zones, setting fire to barricades, looting, and any other kind of dastardly actions[3] just so they can justify their own violence. I believe everybody should be aware of this.

The president himself is being investigated for crimes against humanity.[4]

It would speak truth to power if these facts are added to the article so you can show what really is happening on both sides of the fence.

Don't get me wrong, vandalism isn't that cool, but things can be fixed later, lives are lost forever though.

Protests aren't a nice experience either but that's the point of protests, they have to be noisy and disruptive to draw the institutions' attention so they can focus on the problems at hand and make the changes constituents demand.

Just stop to think about it for a moment, if the only forces who are supposed to guarantee your safety are actively using their powers to suppress, kidnap, disappear/murder you, who's going to stand up for you? There's a reason these protests are happening. I also understand there's people taking advantage of the situation to loot or whatever. There's a bigger problem going on though. (talk) 21:54, 9 November 2019 (UTC)

Sidenote, for everything I didn't cite, it's easily up-lookable.

Return to "2019 Chilean protests" page.