Talk:Otelo Saraiva de Carvalho

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Otelo Saraiva de Carvalho/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Gog the Mild (talk · contribs) 14:49, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

Criteria

Good Article Status - Review Criteria

Further information: WP:WIAGA

A good article is—

1. Well-written:

(a) the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct; and

(b) it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.

2. Verifiable with no original research:

(a) it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline;

(b) reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose);

(c) it contains no original research; and

(d) it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.

3. Broad in its coverage:

(a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic; and

(b) it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).

4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:

(a) media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content; and

(b) media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.

Review

1. Well-written:

Criteria	Notes	Result
(a) (prose)		Pass
(b) (MoS)		Pass

2. Verifiable with no original research:

Criteria	Notes	Result
(a) (references)		Pass
(b) (citations to reliable sources)		Pass
(c) (original research)		Pass
(d) (copyvio and plagiarism)		Pass

3. Broad in its coverage:

Criteria	Notes	Result
(a) (major aspects)		Pass
(b) (focused)		Pass

4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.

Notes	Result
	Pass

5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.

Notes	Result
	Pass

6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:

Criteria	Notes	Result
(a) (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales)	SEE COMMENT BELOW	Pass
(b) (appropriate use with suitable captions)		Pass

Result

Result	Notes
Pass	A solid little article. Well referenced and well illustrated. Neutral in tone, it sticks to the topic and covers what needs covering. Good work. Gog the Mild (talk) 22:00, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

Discussion

Hello, I am struglling with the text editor because the edit source is somewhat more difficult than others I have used in Portuguese wikipedia. The corresponding profile of Otelo in Portuguese changed from what it seemed something similar to this. I have to read it more carefully, but it seems it has issues on the polemics: content problems (spoke on pardons, but not amnesty in the summary) and tone issues ("amnesty also did not please the terrorists"). Hope to be able to help Luluzinha2023 (talk) 21:31, 3 July 2024 (UTC)

@Jp16103: I will start by reviewing AustralianRupert's comments, as it is difficult to go far wrong if following his advice. And Hawkeye7! Another top commentator.

• The lead needs further expansion. Perhaps a sentence on his trial and sentence and one on what he has been doing since retirement.
• Perhaps add a sentence or two on what he has been doing since he retired from public life?
• Is he still married? If not when did he separate? When did he divorce? Is he still in a relationship with Maria Morais? If not, when did it end? Does she have any notability independent of Carvalho?
• You refer to both "Carvalho" and "Otelo". Generally an article is consistent.

Prose.

• "revolutionary process (PREC)" I don't think that you need "(PREC)". I would delete it.
• "under the leadership of Otelo. The coup, allegedly orchestrated by Otelo". Either it was under his leadership or was allegedly under his leadership. Pick one.
• In this paragraph, at the end of 1975 he is in prison. The next paragraph,1976, has him standing for president. A bridging sentence explaining this seems appropriate.
• "In 1989, he was amnestied and a resumption of the procedure was struck down because of a legal imbroglio." What is "the procedure"? Possibly replace with "the case"?
• "After his trial for terrorism charges, Otelo retired from military service and public life in 1989." He was tried 5 years earlier. Do you mean "After being amnestied he retired..."?

A really good little article. Nice work. You should be able to get it to GA rapidly. I will leave you to consider the above. I will be back later to review the images and the references. Gog the Mild (talk) 15:34, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

I have given the article a light copy edit. Let me know if there is anything you don't like or don't understand. Gog the Mild (talk) 15:39, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

• @Jp16103: Unfortunately, two of the images in the article - the two posters - seem to have been posted on Commons without the correct permissions. "Ephemera" is granting permission for use, but it needs to be granted by the copyright holder. So I suspect that the images will shortly be removed from Commons. Could you see if you could come up with some replacements and ping me when you do. Thanks. Gog the Mild (talk) 08:42, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

@Gog the Mild: Thank you for your insight and the review. First and foremost I would like to apologise for the delay in editing the article, I have been very busy. I have made the changes that you recommended, please let me know if there is anything else I should add to the article. Thank you so much for the review and your consideration. Jp16103 21:42, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

• @Jp16103: No problem. Wikipedia isn't going anywhere. I'm glad that you were able to find the time to finish this off. You have clearly put a lot of work into it. Gog the Mild (talk) 22:00, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

More context required In the passage

In 2011, during the Portuguese financial crisis when the country was at the end of the Center-Left government of José Socrates and had to request international financial assistance, Otelo Saraiva de Carvalho stated that he wouldn't have made the revolution if he had known what the country would become after it.[17] He also stated that the country would need a man as honest as Salazar to deal with the crisis, but from a non-fascist perspective.[18]

It almost suggests that Otelo's views started to shift to a more right-wing stance, which isn't true. A better phrasing, and better contextualization of these quotes that are here without enough information to provide a complete context, is needed, since the quotes were controversial at the time and they don't capture the total sentiment of Otelo

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 148.63.83.37 (talk • contribs)

Amnesty - Discussion

The current section on amnesty has problems. I would like to submit for discussion the following proposal (I have references for each point):

The President, Mario Soares, tried to pursue a political solution. The parliament of left wing majority, supported by the socialist PS and the communist party PCP, approved an amnesty “for politically motivated offenses committed between 27 July 1976 and 21 June 1991”, which naturally included those committed by the FP 25 de Abril, but also the right wing organisations such as MDLP. This followed an earlier amnesty that covered offences until 1976 and the pardon in 1991 to the right-wing MDLP operational Ramiro Moreira that had been sentenced to 20 years.

For the approval of the amnesty, the parliament justified that “the legal complexity has made extremely difficult its legal solution. (…) with developments that do not presume the possibility of a just solution in reasonable time.” Relevant to note that amnesty is not equivalent to pardon, as it applies to whom has not been convicted, forgetting eventual committed crimes.

Outside were the so-called "blood crimes" Luluzinha2023 (talk) 23:14, 3 July 2024 (UTC)

Two sources explicitly confirm Amnesty as a form of pardon Encyclopaedia Britannica and Mirriam-Webster, Collins and Cambridge Dictionaries do not comment on the act of pardoning, but also do not disallow it, as their definitions do not discuss it. Specifically the Britannica page on Amnesty states "Technically, however, an amnesty differs from a general pardon in that the latter simply relieves from punishment whereas the former declares innocence or abolishes the crime."

I want to move (as mentioned by @Jp16103 in a page history comment) in line with this definition of Amnesty to remove the demarcation of terrorist from the Otelo page, and its use in an objective manner, only having it mentioned as an accusation from pre-amnesty groups.

@Jp16103 also mentioned the "Global Terrorism Database™ (GTD), curated by the University of Maryland" concerning the FP25 and Otelo who was tried as a member of it. The definition of terrorism that is being referred to here is likely within the realm of Britannica's accepted definition: "Although terrorism in this usage implies an act of violence by a state against its domestic enemies, since the 20th century the term has been applied most frequently to violence aimed, either directly or indirectly, at governments in an effort to influence policy or topple an existing regime." This applies to the FP25 incidents, with the violence being aimed (ideally, but not all of the time) primarily at the government at the time. Using this definition of anti-state "terror", the institution that makes thart accusation (the Portuguese government) is the one that the violence is being aimed at (primarily) and therefore as a democratic institution has the legal right to assign blame in it's own vision. Again as stated previously the amnesty which in most popularly peer reviewed published definitions specifically mentions a pardoning for crimes. The GTD as an American University database has at it's disposal the ability to assign and catalogue as many incidents as it likes for it's database, but the term "Global" here means registering global incidents, not global consent/ agreement on whether or not a group is guilty of a crime within a certain state.

Therefore I would like to see the removal of his designation as a terrorist considering it is widely accepted that amnesty "-declares innocence or abolish[ing of a crime]." Britannica and other sources also discuss the controversial nature of the term terrorist, and one which causes alot of scholarly debate (i.e. state vs. non-state etc.). I believe that including accusations by victims, journalists, and governments etc. is key to creating an impersonal historical article, but that stating (by indicating absolute objectivity) that because an American University has added a group to it's terrorism database that, that means that all University's agree with this stance, including Portuguese, European or other institutions like the UN, is false. Flarehayr (talk) 18:08, 24 October 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for opening this discussion and providing context. It’s clear that amnesty laws and their implications are complex, and I agree that we need to handle the terminology around Otelo Saraiva de Carvalho’s involvement with the FP-25 carefully. However, there are a few key points to clarify regarding how amnesty functions and how Wikipedia should interpret terms like "terrorism" in a neutral, evidence-based manner.

Definition and Legal Implications of Amnesty: While amnesty may remove the legal repercussions of certain acts, it does not declare innocence nor erase historical records of actions. As the Encyclopaedia Britannica mentions, amnesty often addresses punishment rather than absolving responsibility. This distinction is crucial, as it helps differentiate the legal aspect of amnesty from the historical documentation of the acts committed. While an amnesty might align with political reconciliation efforts, it does not retroactively redefine the nature of the actions taken by groups like FP-25.

The Classification of FP-25’s Actions as Terrorism: The Global Terrorism Database (GTD), curated by the University of Maryland, categorizes FP-25 as responsible for over 20 terrorist incidents based on their violent acts against government officials and civilians. This designation is grounded in widely recognized definitions of terrorism, which involve violence aimed at instilling fear or forcing political change.

Amnesty and Historical Context: While amnesty allowed FP-25 members to avoid prosecution or reduce sentences, this does not alter the historical record of their actions being labeled as terrorism by multiple reputable sources. Additionally, the amnesty granted to Otelo and others does not change their public or academic designation, particularly in sources like GTD, which are designed to record incidents based on factual criteria rather than political outcomes.

Neutral Presentation in the Article: To ensure neutrality, it may be appropriate to present the fact of Otelo’s amnesty within the article, along with its political context, but without removing the historical classification of FP-25 as a terrorist group. This approach would align with Wikipedia’s goal of maintaining a neutral point of view by reflecting reliable sources rather than implying a particular stance on Otelo’s innocence or guilt.

A few more sources that classify the FP25 as a terrorist organization

• -"O Terrorismo e as FP 25 Anos" by José Barra da Costa (Edições Colibri, 2004) an excellent source that explicitly classifies the FP-25 as a terrorist organization.
• - "Presos por um Fio: Portugal e as FP-25 de Abril" by Nuno Gonçalo Poças is another authoritative source that classifies the FP-25 as a terrorist group. Published in 2021, this book provides a comprehensive history of FP-25, examining their violent acts, which included bombings, bank robberies, and assassinations. Poças places FP-25 within the broader context of European leftist terrorism, emphasizing the politically motivated nature of their actions aimed at destabilizing Portugal's government and societal structure​
• - The Observador article titled "À lei da bala. Os 25 anos sobre a amnistia às Forças Populares-25 de Abril" is a powerful source for categorizing the FP-25 as a terrorist organization. It offers a comprehensive retrospective on the violent activities carried out by FP-25, detailing bombings, assassinations, and robberies that marked their campaign in Portugal. The article situates FP-25 alongside other notorious European terrorist groups of the 1980s, like the Red Brigades and ETA, underscoring the widespread fear and disruption they caused across the country.[[1]]

The article should therefore keep the current terminology, as documented in academically recognized sources, and ensure that both the amnesty and the nature of FP-25's activities are clearly presented, allowing readers to understand both the political and historical contexts.J Pratas (talk) 22:17, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

Structure

I propose to reorganise the following section and subsections to become more neutral and more informative:

OLD STRUCTURE: Terrorism and imprisonment

- Terrorism and imprisonment

- Arrest and judgment

- Amnesty

- Assassinations and blood crimes

NEW STRUCTURE: FUP/FP 25 de abril: imprisonment and release

- Terrorism

- Imprisonment

- Judgment and amnesty on political offences

- Judgement and acquittal on blood crimes Luluzinha2023 (talk) 23:30, 3 July 2024 (UTC)