Talk:List of FARC attacks in 2005

NPOV

Howdy! I've marked this new article NPOV. It seems pretty fawning about the FARC, and the title is really wacky. I'm hoping the original author or others can fix it. Also, can anyone discuss why this should not be merged into FARC? - CHAIRBOY (☎) 04:33, 20 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

User :Juancarlos2004 will be editing this article. See his talk page. - Unsigned comment by 203.94.94.22

Why did you delete the NPOV tag without discussing it here? I'm full of WP:AGF, but your actions seem questionable. I'll put it back tomorrow if someone else doesn't, but this is 3RR realm. - CHAIRBOY (☎) 05:31, 20 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I can tell, the main reason to not merge this into FARC (or perhaps more properly, the subset of FARC-related pieces that have surfaced recently, which logically still need some work) has to do with length concerns. A secondary reason has to do with the perceived importance of the FARC's specific changes in strategy in recent months. Still, I do agree with Chairboy in the sense that the NPOV tag is justified until necessary edits are made or discussed, and should not be unilaterally removed. As User 203.94.... had previously mentioned, I do intend to make edits to try to at least begin to fix that, but obviously this doesn't mean that contributions from other Wikipedia members aren't welcome and/or necessary too. Juancarlos2004 15:12, 20 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I think this article is fine, and rightly seperated from the main FARC article. Can we take off the POV tag? "Wacky title?" ?? Maybe to someone who doesnt live in Colombia it is...

I'm removing the tag for now, since several changes, including the title, have been made in the days and months following its inclusion. If anyone still has any objections , obviously this can be discussed all over again. Juancarlos2004 16:21, 7 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

i dont know why, and i migth be at risk by saying this (pero que carajo) but i think all pages related with FARC-EP arent written from a neutral point of view. that tag should be added, with the controversial issue. also, i would edit all the stuff related with "killed soldiers"

Hola, welcome to Wikipedia. I don't think that you are really "at risk", all things considered, at least not due to anything you might do here (don't know about your situation in real life, obviously). In any case, I agree (though perhaps for different reasons) that those articles still need a lot of work, in one way or another. If it's possible, could you explain more clearly what your point of view is? Exactly what would you want to edit, and edit into what? Thanks in advance. Btw, please try to read the guidelines on how to edit pages, sign comments and so on. Juancarlos2004 22:21, 15 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]