Talk:Che Guevara: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively ← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 20:43, 29 February 2008 editMattisse (talk \| contribs)78,542 edits →Executing the innocent ?: new section← Previous edit		Latest revision as of 13:03, 31 December 2024 edit undoPrezbo (talk \| contribs)Extended confirmed users9,548 edits →Category:Stalinism: new sectionTag: New topic
Line 1:		Line 1:
	{{~~FAR~~}}		{{Talk header}}
			{{WikiProject banner shell\|collapsed=yes\|class=GA\|vital=yes\|blp=no\|listas=Guevara, Che\|1=
	{{ArticleHistory
			{{WikiProject Biography\|military-work-group=yes\|military-priority=top\|politician-work-group=yes\|politician-priority=top\|core=yes}}
			{{WikiProject Socialism\|importance=top}}
			{{WikiProject Military history\|class=GA\|Biography=yes\|South-American=yes\|Cold-War=yes}}
			{{WikiProject Argentina\|topic=hist\|importance=Top}}
			{{WikiProject Cuba\|importance=Top}}
			{{WikiProject Caribbean\|importance=High}}
			{{WikiProject Basque}}
			{{WikiProject Politics\|importance=mid}}
			{{WikiProject Atheism\|importance=mid}}
			{{WikiProject Bolivia\|importance=mid\|Selected=yes}}
			{{WikiProject History\|importance=}}
			}}
			{{Not a forum}}
			{{Article history
	\|action1=FAC		\|action1=FAC
	\|action1date=06:42, 3 Aug 2004		\|action1date=06:42, 3 Aug 2004
	\|action1link=Misplaced Pages:Featured article candidates/Archived nominations/July 2004#Che Guevara		\|action1link=Misplaced Pages:Featured article candidates/Archived nominations/July 2004#Che Guevara
	\|action1result=not promoted		\|action1result=not promoted
	\|action1oldid=5172606

	\|action2=FAC		\|action2=FAC
Line 17:		Line 30:
	\|action3link=Misplaced Pages:Peer review/Che Guevara/archive1		\|action3link=Misplaced Pages:Peer review/Che Guevara/archive1
	\|action3oldid=31662411		\|action3oldid=31662411



	\|action4=GAN		\|action4=GAN
Line 25:		Line 40:
	\|action5=FAC		\|action5=FAC
	\|action5date=11:45, 10 March 2006		\|action5date=11:45, 10 March 2006
	\|action5link=Misplaced Pages:Featured article candidates/Che Guevara		\|action5link=Misplaced Pages:Featured article candidates/Che Guevara/archive1
	\|action5result=promoted		\|action5result=promoted
	\|action5oldid=43115765		\|action5oldid=43115765

			\|action6=FAR
	\|maindate=June 18, 2006
			\|action6date=12:48, 23 April 2008
	\|currentstatus=FA
			\|action6link=Misplaced Pages:Featured article review/Che Guevara/archive1
	}}
			\|action6result=removed
	{{WikiProjectBanners
			\|action6oldid=207517874
	\|1={{WPMILHIST\|class=FA \|nested=yes}}
	\|2={{WPBiography\|living=no\|class=FA\|priority=Top\|core=yes\|military-work-group=yes\|nested=yes}}
	\|3={{WPArgentina\|topic=hist\|importance=Top\|class=FA \|nested=yes}}
	\|4={{WP Cuba\|class=FA\|importance=Top \|nested=yes}}
	\|5={{WikiProject Caribbean\|class=FA\|importance=High \|nested=yes}}
	\|6={{WikiProject Basque \|nested=yes}}
	}}
	{{Controversial}}
	{{Communism Portal selected\|biography\|small=yes}}
	{{WP1.0\|v0.5=pass\|class=FA\|category=History\|WPCD=yes\|small=yes}}
	<div style="background-color: #f0f0ff; border: wide; padding: 5px;">
	{{archive box\|
	],
	],
	],<br />
	],
	],
	],<br />
	],
	],
	],<br />
	],
	],
	]<br>
	]
	]
	<br /><br />
	],<br />
	],<br />
	]<br /><br />
	]
	}}
	</div>

			\| action7 = GAN
	== ] ==
			\| action7date = 20:26, 28 August 2009
	Discussions leading up to the ] are contained in ]. ] (]) 16:55, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
			\| action7link = Talk:Che Guevara/GA1
			\| action7result = listed
			\| action7oldid = 310600306

			\| currentstatus = FFA/GA
	:I'm putting the dead link checker at the top of the page, as it may be needed often: ] (]) 17:19, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
			\| topic = socsci

			\|maindate=June 18, 2006
	Also putting these at the top for easy access:
	*
	*
	] (]) 16:49, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

			\|otd1date=2004-10-08\|otd1oldid=6486377
	==Planned article revert==
			\|otd2date=2005-10-08\|otd2oldid=25078099
	<s>Consensus has developed on the ] that the article should be reverted to one of these versions:</s>
			\|otd3date=2006-10-08\|otd3oldid=79971650

			\|otd4date=2009-10-07\|otd4oldid=318560887
	*Featured version, (42 KB readable prose)
			\|otd5date=2010-10-07\|otd5oldid=389306797
	*After main page appearance, (46 KB readable prose)
			\|otd6date=2011-10-08\|otd6oldid=454428297
	and rebuilt from there.
			\|otd7date=2013-10-08\|otd7oldid=576096069

			\|otd8date=2017-10-08\|otd8oldid=804314895
	Please discuss and develop consensus here for which of the two versions is the best revert target. ] (]) 17:16, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
			\|otd9date=2019-10-08\|otd9oldid=920091451

			\|otd10date=2022-10-08\|otd10oldid=1114803432
	*'''Several questions/clarifications:''' you state ''"consensus has developed"'' ... exactly how was that was achieved, how many people were consulted, and when/where did it take place? I am aware of the fact that 3-4 people ''(1 overtly bias and one who arose out of nowhere)'' had mentioned that they felt the article had contained POV issues, but that was before Matisse and Polaris did extensive cleaning up. Has the article been examined recently? Also under what/whose authority has it been decided that a revert will be the course of action? ] (] TR 19:40, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
			}}{{User:MiszaBot/config
	:*Have you read the FAR page linked above? Your questions are answered there. <s>As of now, you are the only editor opposing a revert.</s> ] (]) 20:00, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
			\|maxarchivesize = 250K
	::*Also noting that the FAR has been up since 23 February and all involved editors and relevant WikiProjects have been notified. ] (]) 02:02, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
			\|counter = 22
	:::* Withdrawing Support for revert, see note in next section. ] (]) 06:08, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
			\|minthreadsleft = 5

			\|algo = old(60d)
	=== Choice of versions ===
			\|archive = Talk:Che Guevara/Archive %(counter)d

			}}
	My preference would be for the earlier March 10 version because it is 10 kbs shorter and the writing cleaner. I think the POV has started to set in by the June 19 version. That version ends with the view of Che Guevara as "Jim Morrison with an assault rifle." This is the sort of statement I feel does not belong in the main article, as it represents a narrow global view and is culturally bound to a certain political view and even a particular age group. ] 17:55, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

	:I am in agreement with Mattisse. -- ] (]) 18:08, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

	:<s>I'll accept either of the two versions, but agree that the brevity of the earlier version provides the cleanest starting place. </s> ] (]) 20:26, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

	:I agree as well.--] (]) 02:50, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

	::'''Withdraw support''': to my surprise, I have only realized in the last hour that the target versions (March 2006 and June 2006) in fact do not reflect Zleitzen's work on the article. According to , Zleitzen did not begin editing the article until August 2006, so in fact, reverting to the March 2006 will undo the work Zleitzen put into the article rather than reinstate it. I'm mystified that no one here pointed this out earlier, as it must have been apparent that I was working under the mistaken assumption that the March 2006 version would get us closer to the kind of sourcing preferred by Zleitzen, when in fact, that is apparently not correct. Certainly, the article has significantly deteriorated since Zleitzen stopped editing in July 2007, but I no longer believe that March 2006 is the best target date for a revert. ] (]) 06:08, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

	===Steps to restore===
	Several questions were raised on the featured article review. No, reverting doesn't affect the talk page, and no, a sandbox version of the original featured version isn't needed (it's in the article history). Someone may want to save a sandbox version of the , so that anything you later want to retrieve from it can easily be found. I offer to do the initial steps in the revert, including an {{t1\|inuse}} tag as needed until I'm finished, once the version is decided. Steps to restoring will include:

	*1. Revert to the chosen version. (I offer to complete all of the steps in 1)
	**1a. Reinstate infobox from current version
	**1b. Reinstate from current version categories, interwikis, nav templates at the bottom of the page, persondata; in short, everything in the current bottom of the article from {{t1\|Che Guevara}} down.
	**1c. Reinstate sister links from current version
	**1d. Review for current ] standards, add ISBNs, do basic ref formatting cleanup to a consistent ref style (thru 1c will take me a few minutes once I start; 1d could take me a full day)
	*2. '''Before''' any other changes are made:
	**2a. Recheck all hatnote template links at tops of sections
	***This step includes making sure any new daughter articles (created since the featured version) are linked somewhere in the article; perhaps begin now to make a list of daughter articles?
	**2b. Verify that all external links in sources are still live, some may need to be retrieved from the internet archive (www.archive.org) or from the current version. Restore and update all dead links:
	**2c. Verify that all wikilinks are still accurate (this will be time consuming, regular editors may want to divide up the work and go through each section, checking on old links that may have changed or new articles that may have been added and need to be linked). Be aware of ] and ]ing.
	*3. Once it is determined that the article is completely restored, further work needed before content changes begin:
	**3a. Scan the article and identify any outdated info, such as anything beginning with "as of".
	**3b. Review for citations needed
	***Note: Zleitzen's version (rightly) used scholarly sources that may not be available online.
	**3c. Decide which images to bring forward from current version
	*4. Begin content revisions
	**4a. Review for POV
	**4b. Discourage addition of any new cruft that isn't specifically justified, for example, per ] or content that is already included or should be included in daughter articles.
	**4c. Update as needed.
	**4d. Review again for current ] standards

	I believe those are the steps; please indicate anything I've missed so I can add it in. I also suggest allowing a few days to be certain consensus has formed before beginning this work. Discussion of the article should be on the article talk page; as the FAR moves along, others will be reading that page, and it isn't helpful to fill it up with unnecessary chatter and detail that can be dealt with on the article talk page. The FAR page should be used for determining whether the article meets or not featured standards. ] (]) 17:16, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

	: I don't have much time to help, but I just had a glance at this; it looks reasonable. Should we make a workspace page for sorting out problematic links, or should we just plan on fixing them in place? I would think a workspace page would be useful, because it would allow a complete list of all the links that had issues and then make it clear what has been done about each of them. - ] \| ] 20:15, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
	::Welcome to you! If you think a workspace page would be useful, then that is fine with me. I have never been involved in such a major project as this revert, so any advice/help from you is welcome. Polaris999 will be very happy. Your method sounds like a good way of organizing this. ] 21:14, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

	::Hello Jmabel -- It is great to see you here!! -- ] (]) 22:17, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

	:::For the record, I have been involved in several undertakings of this nature (the most difficult, ] remains featured and is a fine article). In one case, because a revert to a much older version was done without advance notice, without cooperation, and without a plan, the article ended up defeatured. If everyone isn't on board, the endeavour will not likely succeed and is not worth attempting. Unless there is concurrence, the article should just remain tagged and be defeatured. Civility and cooperation over the very long haul are key. ] (]) 21:42, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

	*Are we settled over who will do what? As I understand it, ] will do Step 1 tomorrow (Thursday). After Sandy is done, ] will handle template problems and such, while ] will have the list of the links on a workpage and check them. I am willing to do the hatnote links. I can check the wikilinks. Then, at Step 3 I believe we should reconnoiter and gain consensus before deciding on images, quality of replacement sources, etc. Is this to your understanding, Sandy? ] 13:06, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
	:* Sounds good. I'm busy most of today (Wednesday), intend to do all of Step 1 tomorrow (Thursday) unless consensus changes, and btw I have jury duty beginning (and hopefully ending) on Friday. I'll leave most of the rest to all of you, and weigh in as needed, mostly watching that MoS is followed, refs are clean, consensus is respeced, and so on. ] (]) 15:01, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

	==Work on article==
	It seems to me that Step two is fairly uncontroversial and any problems can be brought to the talk page. I am certainly willing to list hatnotes and check wikilinks. I know some of the external links to sources are dead. Polaris999 probably has the off line sources Zleitzen had (I'm guessing), and he probably is best for replacing dead reference links. Also, searches of standard sources such as BBC News will probably due for standard biographical stuff. Polaris999 and I are adamant that only sources meeting ] and ] be used. We can discuss any problems on the talk page. Polaris999 has said he will do the template stuff. As far as citation style, I am used to ] but will use what ever is preferred for the article.

	At step three, we will discuss issues of image and vet all citations on the talk page.
	At step four, of course, we will have to discuss. My view is that Guevara had been dead for over 50 years. Overly detailed descriptions, controversies, and legacy issues can take place in daughter articles. Much of the controversy now about Che has little to do with him as a person, in my opinion, and more with our collective state of mind today. My view is that if we cannot settle on a consensus regarding wording, then leave whatever it is out.

	Hopefully, by concentrating on the task at hand we will quickly develop a good working group so that POV issues can be rationally discussed, allowing for differing view to arrive at compromises. ] 19:54, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
	: I hope there will be an attempt to avoid citing the popular press (BBC for example) when better scholarly or academic sources are available. Also, the featured version did ''not'' use cite templates, I personally hate them since they chunk up the article size and loadtime so badly, and if you intend to use them, you'll have to switch over all of the existing citations, which would be very time consuming. Since ] says not to mix citation styles, and not to switch the original style used (specifically, not to switch to cite templates), I highly recommend sticking to the citation method established by Zleitzen. ] guidelines dictate the same, unless there is consensus to change. ] (]) 20:06, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
	::As I said above, I will use whatever others are using for reference formatting. As far as sources, I only have a few books on Cuba, and none specifically on Che Guevara. I will have to count on Polaris999 then. ] 20:36, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
	:::I myself have almost every book on Che Guevara in print (20 +) and will be willing to look up issues in the ones I have. Also Matisse how much have you ever read or researched about Che Guevara? I ask because I would contend that context and point of view can only truly be judged with an in depth understanding of the subject matter, and would encourage everyone interested in formulating the new article, to first independently research the man in question. It could only enhance the final product. ] (] TR 21:21, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
	::::Actually, upon looking at the references in the version of March 10, I have all the print books Zleitzen uses. ] 16:27, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
	::::: Looking at the , I see some Geocities (personal, non-reliable sources) that will need to be replaced, so maybe you all can begin to look at those now. Also, I'll be putting a simpler and easier footnote style in place. It's not necessary to repeat all of the information on each book source in every footnote when the book date is already listed in References. That method just chunks up the text and makes it harder to edit. So, I will change (for example):
	:::::* Anderson, Jon Lee. Che Guevara: A Revolutionary Life, New York: 1997, Grove Press, p. 3
	::::: to
	:::::* Anderson (1997), p. 3
	::::: Cleaner, simpler, easier. I'll do all of that sort of work while I have the article in use tomorrow. ] (]) 16:37, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
	:::::::This posting has been delayed by an "edit conflict" -- Help, Mattisse! I am lost already. I do not know what I should be doing at this point, but I started looking at the refs and checking the URLs that many of them link to ... I am now more than halfway through this task and, even though I am not sure whether I am supposed to be doing it or not, I am documenting my work so that it at least can serve as a checklist if this is someone else's job. Are you working on the same thing? If so, please have a look at: ]. Also, I have a replacement template ready for use as per SandyGeorgia's instructions. -- ] (]) 16:48, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
	:::::::: Polaris, do you know how to use http://www.archive.org ? You can look up dead links there. ] (]) 16:59, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
	::::::::: Hello, SandyGeorgia. Yes, thank you, I do use archive.org. However, whenever possible, I will opt for replacing references to URLs with books, per your recommendation. I am proceeding with the task of reviewing the refs as I don't imagine anyone will be too disappointed if they find it has been done :-)   When I finish it, I would very much appreciate having one or more of you review my work and make suggestions, additions, etc. -- ] (]) 17:12, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

	:::::: Also, if anyone wants to get on something today (I'm going to be out this afternoon), there is an ISBN finder in the userbox on my userpage. We need a list of ISBN numbers for all the books. I'd like to add those in while I'm working on the article tomorrow, and looking all of them up will slow me down. ] (]) 16:41, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

	Allrighty, since consensus hasn't changed, I'll put the article in use tomorrow (after I get through my morning watchlist), and start the revert. In case anyone is wondering, I could have done all of it in advance in a sandbox and then just popped it in with one edit, but I don't think that's a good way to go on a controversial article and a revert to a very old version. The reason I want to put it in use and go methodically step by step as outlined above is so that the article history will clearly show each step, and you all can follow along and feel comfortable with the work done. For such an old revert, popping in something I developed in sandbox might not inspire future confidence about the integrity of the revert, and doing it "live" will provide future transparency. ] (]) 02:26, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

	==Cite.php==
	Actually, it was Jmabel and I who introduced the ] system into the CG article. At that time, "Che Guevara's Involvement in the Cuban Revolution" already existed as a separate entity and I did not convert its footnotes. Later when Zleitzen started working on it and expressed frustration about the deplorable state of its footnotes, rather than converting them all manually as I had done in the main CG article, I ran User:Cyde/Ref converter on them, with very satisfactory results. That discussion, and the results of running the converter can be seen . If others are in agreement, I would favor using User:Cyde/Ref converter on whatever footnotes may need to be translated into ] style as a "first pass"; we can then refine the output as necessary. Mattisse, re finding needed citations in books I own, I will certainly be glad to do so, and am pleased to see that Redthoreau also has volunteered. -- ] (]) 22:58, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

	:Hey! I did the same thing for Zleitzen when we were working on the ] article! ] 23:26, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
	::Only I did it by hand -- that was the olden days. Maybe you will shown me your automated way. ] 23:39, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
	:::That's funny! Certainly I will show you. You might start by reading the link under "here" above. Actually, there is not much more to it than that ... -- ] (]) 00:01, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
	::::There is no "here" under "here". Did you mean to leave a link there? ] 00:10, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
	::::: ] (]) 00:17, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
	:::::: And now that I've read that link, I believe Polaris is confused. The CG article already uses the cite.php system, and there is nothing to be converted. No wonder his info confused me, as I also used cyde in the olden days, but we are beyond that. This article does use cite.php, and it already has ref tags. What it doesn't use is cite templates (]), which is a method for formatting citations within the ref tags. I STRONGLY oppose switching styles (unless you all override me) because the cite templates chunk up the text, making it hard to copyedit and hard to read. Please and look at it in edit mode to see the refs it already has; there is no reason to waste time changing them to a clunky citation method. I'll wait til you all catch up to undo the changes I did in the steps above. Having to manually convert perfectly good citations to horrid cite templates will be a huge waste of time, IMO. I can clean up the ref formatting as part of step one, and we can continue with the same citation style used by Zleitzen, which is already in cite.php format. ] (]) 00:22, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

	:::::Yes, the Converter says all the footnotes are in the ] style, so no need to do anything except update them as a first step, I guess? Or provide better sources when available? -- ] (]) 00:37, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

	:::::: Right. Some of the ref formatting in the featured version is inconsistent although complete. During Step 1, I will do the basic kind of ref cleanup I always do, leaving one bibliographic style in place that we can then follow throughout. (Things like, journal names are italicized, newspaper title are in quotes, all authors with last name first, and so on.) ] (]) 00:49, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

	:::::::Great. I will wait for you to assign me a specific task. -- ] (]) 06:26, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

	::ugh, OK, I will add that step in the list above, which will be a factor that will slow things down. Polaris, are you going to handle that with Cyde? I'll add it in above, and then we'll have to check that all is in order before moving forward. That will change the order of things above. ] (]) 23:39, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

	:::Don't worry, it won't slow anything down -- I can do it myself and it will take about 30 seconds! -- ] (]) 23:57, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
	::::Ok. I added that step in above, but we should make sure everything checks out before moving forward from there. That means I'll have to do basic ref cleanup and ISBN additions after you convert. ] (]) 00:00, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

	==Problems with March 10th version to address==
	If there is a tidal wave to revert then I may not be able to stop it, and thus will accept it. However from reading the March 10th version I noticed some glaring issues that would have to be addressed, I believe in the new article, (Which I would want to be a part of crafting)

	'''Problems with March 10th version that must be addressed ...'''

	- ''“Revolutionary, politician, and Cuban guerrilla leader.”'' – no mention of him being an author ? He wrote more books during his lifetime than most authors. Also no mention of his contributions as a military tactician or social theorist ? His ideas involve philosophy just as much, if not more, than military theory.

	- ''“Arbenz’s Social Revolution”'' ? Huh ? That is about the worst way to describe the systematic changes that Arbenz was attempting to implement.

	- ''“Guevara Died at the hands of the Bolivian army”'' ... what kind of wording is that ? Were they cradling his head as he passed away from old age ?
	_I think you are confusing "died in the arms of" with "died at the hands of". The wording is correct. <small>—Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 17:33, 28 February 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

	- Inclusion of the fact that Che ''“pawned jewelry”'' when money was tight ? How is this relevant and significant ? Especially when other minute details are considered “overbearing”.

	- ''“Guevara met Fidel”'' – sounds like they attended the same soccer game and bumped into each other. Raul (Castro’s brother and current Cuban President introduced Che to Fidel)

	- 4 lines on Che’s role in the Play ''“Evita”'' ? There should be 0.

	- The entire criticism section is for lack of a better word ''“crap”'' and certain non credible parts would have to be removed to another article. Also what is with the shout out to Chemart.com ? Are we going to also link the article to Che-lives.com as well and offer discounts on T-shirts? This particular criticism section does not belong in the new article whatsoever and if people desire it, it should be a sister article. Also citing Álvaro Vargas Llosa makes the article laughable. He is a self-identified partisan hack.

	'''With that said''' ... I believe that the March 10th version could be morphed into a good article with the work of several people. I myself would want to take part in the process as I consider my knowledge on the issue considerable, and I have the desire to put in the effort and will cede final decisions on my contributions to Polaris ... whose judgment and objectivity I trust. ] (] TR 21:10, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

	:Red, if the revert is decided upon, will you agree to follow the steps above? That is, will you wait for steps 1 to 3 to be completed before beginning content revisions? If not, the job will be very complicated; everyone will just get in each other's way if content changes begin before the article is fully restored. And no, criticism can't be removed, as that violates POV forking at ] and ]. Will you agree to proceed in an orderly manner so the article can be restored before it is changed? This could take, perhaps (not sure) a few days to at most a week. ] (]) 21:16, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
	:: '''Response''' I understand that a section on Criticism is ‘par for the course’, but not that particular laughable one. Filled with innuendo, hyperbole, unfounded accusation, and product placement. Also the size should be kept to a reasonable length and should not be any longer than any of the other article sections. -------- Moreover, if the revision is decided upon, I would agree to wait the week or so for the article to be ready for edits. Also I would insist that the images in the present article that meet Misplaced Pages standards remain included, along with the post prose book/film references etc – which I believe are much more complete than the March 10 version. Also on matters where people believe I am inserting POV, I will cede to the judgment of Polaris. ] (] TR 21:28, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
	:::It is unlikely that ''all'' of your demands will be met, as almost everyone else disagrees, but each item can be discussed in due course, recognizing consensus. The central question is if you are willing to proceed according to consensus and let the restore work happen before work begins on the items you mention so that we don't get crossed up before the article is restored. ] (]) 21:34, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
	::::I am willing to compromise, cede my wishes when showed actual wiki policy which contradicts it, trust the objectivity evaluation of Polaris, and yes will wait the week or so, for the article to be restored to a state that can be edited. ] (] ] (]) 21:42, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

	::::: I'm glad to hear that, Red. Mattisse just left (today) FAR notifications at all relevant WikiProjects, so I suggest we wait a bit more for consensus to develop. In the meantime, people might want to begin reviewing ahead on the steps, to see what they can work on in Step 2, once I complete Step 1. ] (]) 21:45, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

	::::::Hello Redthoreau -- Thank you very much for your vote of confidence which I truly appreciate, but I had already opted out of POV matters via the following message on the FAR page, i.e.:

	:::::::"Hello, Mattisse. I am a bit of a "templater" and would be glad to work with others, or on my own, to update those as needed. It is mainly the POV issues in which I do not wish to participate. -- Polaris999 (talk) 18:18, 25 February 2008 (UTC)"

	::::::In any case, all decisions here need to be taken collectively and I have no doubt that working together in a calm, deliberate and respectful manner we will be able to achieve our common objective of creating an excellent article. -- ] (]) 22:30, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

	==Consistency in ref formatting==
	I will list issues here so we can all be on the same page before we start. ] (]) 17:02, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
	* Full dates in citations need to have a consistent format and consistent wikilinking (see ]). I will default to the method Zleitzen used, which is linking in the format day month year (Latin American style). Please note that accessdates as well as publication dates should be consistently linked, and the "raw" format (day month year) should also be consistent, since most of our readers aren't logged in, don't have accounts, don't have user preferences, and only see the raw version.
	* Zleitzen used, "accessed day month year", but I see some capital Accessed, Accessed on and Retrieved on have crept in. I will stick to one style, the one originally established by Zleitzen (accessed, no uppercase, no "on").
	* Journal and newspaper names and book titles are italicized; article names are not, websites are not. Newspaper and journal article titles are in quotes. (See ] and ]).
	* I will always default to listing author last name first for ease of alphabetical location in the source list. The format I'll use will be:
	:* Last name, first name (year). (Note punctuation). On listings that have no identified author, the publication date moves to after the publisher.
	* Book sources that are used more than once will have full info listed in the References section (we need ISBNs on all of those, see the ISBN finder in the user box on my user page). It's not necessary to repeat all of the information on each book source in every footnote when the book data is already listed in References. So, I will change (for example):
	:* Anderson, Jon Lee. ''Che Guevara: A Revolutionary Life'', New York: 1997, Grove Press, p. 3 to
	:* Anderson (1997), p. 3 If there is more than one book by the same author, title is also included. This will make it far easier to update citations, you only have to have author and page no.
	*There are ''numerous'' citations problems in the current (and featured) versions. Note ], I will reduce those. Note consistency in date linking mentioned above. Note that all websources need an accessed date.
	*There is also some current inconsistency in order of items in citations. I will put author before title, and publisher after title. (Some of the current entries have publishers listed first as if they were authors.)
	I'll add more to this list as it occurs to me. Keeping a consistent citation style from the beginning, per ], will avoid having to fix them all at the end, which is extremely tedious work. Cleaning up the existing citations to a consistent style will take me quite a bit of time tomorrow. ] (]) 17:17, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

	:*I think you said that newspapers were not good sources. However, in the ] article, BBC News was excellent as they have reporters assigned to bureaus in Cuba and other countries, unlike U.S. media. What do you thing? ] 17:28, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
	::* I'll leave that up to you all because you have access to academic and scholarly sources that I don't have, but in general, I would certainly prefer scholarly sources over any media source. Specifically, the BBC's past reporting on ] was clearly biased (pro-Chavez), although they've gotten more neutral recently. In general, I'd always prefer academic or scholarly sources, particularly on someone who has been dead for 50 years and about whom much has been written. Relying on the popular press in this case (just because it's available online) isn't necessary. That's my 2 cents, but you all can evaluate each source vis-a-vis the scholarly sources. ] (]) 17:32, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
	:::*O.K. But surprisingly little has been written about Che Guevara in scholarly and academic sources. The first reasonable biography was written in 1997. Most writings are very pro or very con, or written by Che himself. Anyone reading this, please correct me if I am wrong. ] 17:59, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
	::::*Anyway, I want to make sure we have a consistent ref formatting style in place, and let you all sort out the best sources to use. ] (]) 18:01, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

	:::::I have posted my list of refs with problems ] -- ] (]) 18:52, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
	:::::* I hate to say this after the fact but: you seem to have omitted the URLs wherever they were "broken" URLs. Actually, even "broken" URLs may be very useful in finding a substitute. It may be on an archive somewhere, either on that particular web site, a closely related web site, or one (like the Internet Archive) that uses old URLs as part of its indexing. - ] \| ] 00:37, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
	::::::Hello Jmabel -- Thank you for pointing this out. I omitted the URL in the case of ref#2 because I had already checked it myself and tried to find it on "wayback" and couldn't (it exists there, but only in 2007 and I thought that since the version of CG that we are going to use was written in 2006 it would be inappropriate to use a 2007 version of a source which could be quite different) and I knew that a book was available as a source and I am going to provide that as a reference instead; for these reasons, I didn't think anybody would want the non-working URL, but I will add it now and check to make sure the others are there also. -- ] (]) 02:16, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
	:::::::Or maybe you were saying that I should put in the URLs for all of them, even those that are still working? I will be glad to do that also. -- ] (]) 02:25, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
	:::::::::They are ''all'' in there now. -- ] (]) 03:14, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
	:::::I would like to volunteer to take a "first pass" at the images. Meaning, I would restore/fix them as seems best to me, then others can discuss and make modifications as they consider necessary. (I am thinking in particular of the TIME cover which I will restore but which may or may not meet "Fair Use"; others will have to decide about this because I am not an expert.) -- ] (]) 22:03, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
	::::::That is great, as you are familiar with the history of image problems in that article. ] 22:21, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
	::::::I am working on them now. -- ] (]) 03:14, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
	:::::::::And the work I have done on the images is at ] -- ] (]) 04:42, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

	::::::: Before spending any time on bringing in images, it would be good to run them by somehow well versed in Fair Use, Free Use and other image copyright issues on Wiki to make sure they pass muster for a featured article. I suggest either {{user\|Elcobbola}} or {{User\|Laser brain}} or both; if they can't get to it, then also {{user\|Pagrashtak}}. Perhaps them give a list of the images under consideration to see if they check out? There's no point in bringing in images if they have licensing problems. Also, the current version of the article is a bit heavy on images, verging on Wiki is ] a photo gallery, so they may need to be pared down. ] (]) 22:38, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
	::::::::Also, {{user\|Jmabel}} used to be very good on this issue when he was active. How are you doing all this, since the revert has not occurred yet? ] 22:42, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
	::::::::: How is who doing all of what? ] (]) 22:44, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
	::::::::: Fair use is, by its nature, a great big gray zone, and it is hard to say what will pass muster because attitudes on Misplaced Pages have been evolving (towards allowing only the lightest shades of gray). {{tl\|Non-free use rationale}} gives a lot of clues what they look at:
	:::::::::# It has to be clearly sourced (no trouble in the case of a magazine cover).
	:::::::::# It has to be relevant to the article, and the nature of that relevance has to be spelled out.
	:::::::::# It has to be basically irreplaceable: the image itself has to convey something that is unlikely to be conveyed by any "free use" image we could create (e.g. it's almost impossible to claim fair use for a map, unless there was commentary about the map, not about what the map represents).
	:::::::::# If it is possible to get the point across with less than the whole image, that is good.
	:::::::::# If possible, images should be at a low enough resolution that they would not have the economic value of the original
	:::::::::So, for example, Che on the cover of ''Time'' is not acceptable just as an image of Che, but it is likely to be acceptable in the context of discussion of how the media looked at Che, especially if the article illustrated by the cover is explicitly commented upon in the article, and even more so if the particular image is discussed in that context. Note, however, that it the photo were being discussed independently of ''Time's'' use of the photo, then including the ''Time'' cover as such (rather than an unadorned image) would actually be pretty dubious. The narrower the context, the less some other image could be substituted, the stronger the fair use argument.

	:::::::::Contrary to what some people have said, I believe we are so far from any "line" that there is near-zero risk of legal problems: Misplaced Pages itself is clearly non-commercial and educational, and fair use justification in a non-commercial, educational context is very lenient. We have, however, decided as a community (well, really, this was something I think Jimbo decided almost unilaterally, but others have elaborated the consequences) that we want to confine ourselves to materials that would clearly pass muster when reused commercially. So, in practice, we are being even more cautious than, say, the average newspaper.

	:::::::::Hope that helps. - ] \| ] 00:32, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

	:::::::::: Yes, but. I've given you the names of three editors who are active at FAC and FAR, and who will review the images eventually, so it makes sense to ask them in advance, rather than finding out they're not happy a month from now. ] (]) 01:03, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

	:::::::::Agreed, but it's not enough to show them an image. One also needs to explain the rationale. I was trying to lay the groundwork to do that. The "fairness" of "fair use" only makes sense in the context of a particular usage. It's about the use, not about the image. - ] \| ] 01:28, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
	::::::::::So glad you are back, ]. I know it is just temporary, but it is so calming for me. ] 01:56, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
	:::::::::::: ah, yes, correct. Fair Use rationale depends on the text in the article accompanying the image, so giving a list of images to people won't do the trick. ] (]) 02:22, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

	==Bowing out ==
	Hey, folks, I'm sorry for the news at this stage of the game, but Mattisse is uncomfortable with my participation, so I feel it's best for the article if I bow out now. This sort of undertaking works best if everyone is on the same page to the extent possible. Please rest assured I haven't joked about anyone on my talk page, and I don't know where Mattisse got that impression, but that is best dropped. I didn't "demand" anything, rather I explained how I planned to proceed to gain consensus before we all invested a lot of work. If the "tone this is taking on" is upsetting to a regular editor here, I must bow out for the good of the article. Good luck, I wanted to help, but this is best, and I hope the article can pull through and retain status, in Zleitzen's honor. He was one of the first Wiki editors to befriend me, and I hope his work can be preserved. Unwatching now, regards, ] (]) 04:16, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

	:Sorry to see you let the others down. As for me, you comments about my opinions are almost always critical anyway. The others would probably prefer you stay and I go, so I am willing to do that. ] 17:50, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

	==Linkfarm cleanup revisited==
	I went ahead and did some very standard linkfarm cleanup per ], ], ], and ]. My previous discussions on this got nowhere, so I thought it might be best to be bold. --] (]) 18:08, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
	:I commend you for doing that. ] 19:11, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

	==Further reading section==
	I started looking it over, and noticed there were entries added before their publication dates. Given that the section obviously hasn't been reviewed for such promotional material, and we've no inclusion criteria to keep the list manageable, I've moved it to ] for easy review and discussion. --] (]) 19:50, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
	:Looking back into the edit history, I see that Further reading contained only 6 entries . I think that increasing it to 66 entries in two months is highly questionable. --] (]) 20:00, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

	== "Legacy of Che Guevara" sub-article created ==

	I just created the sub-article ] and transferred the "Legacy" section from the main ] article into it. This removed 26,671 bytes from the ] article.

	Number of references in CG main article before creation of "Legacy" sub-article = 174; number of references in CG main article after creation of "Legacy" sub-article = 118. --] (]) 20:17, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

	: On the whole, I think that's a fine decision. But I'd like to see if we could restore about 150-200 well-balanced words as a summary on the present page. Usually that's what we do when we carve out something like this. Che is enough of an icon among supporters, friendly and hostile critics, detractors, and even many for whom he is ''merely'' an icon, that it seems to me to merit ''some'' mention in this main article on him. - ] \| ] 20:27, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
	::The new article needs a ] section, and this article needs a summary. They should be very similar, and one could be used as a start for the other. --] (]) 20:31, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

	:::Yes, Jmabel, I totally agree that a small "Legacy" section is needed in the article. I have always steered clear of contributing to the "Legacy" section , and would not feel comfortable writing the summary you suggest, so I am hoping that some other editor(s) will step forward to undertake that challenge. -- ] (]) 20:37, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

	::::I do too. It just needs "mentions" of the general effect. So much of the legacy, t-shirts, mugs, has nothing to do with Che. The subarticle is freer to analysis the commercialization etc of Che and other angles. Also (personal opinion) as the Cuba situation resolves itself, perhaps much of the symbolization will lose relevance as it is still driven by the frenetic ideological war. ] <small>—Preceding ] was added at 21:00, 28 February 2008 (UTC)</small><!--Template:Undated--> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

	I've added what I think constitutes a balanced summary of this former section. Feel free to edit. I have not checked the references myself, they are drawn from the recently moved material. - ] \| ] 01:25, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

	== We are no longer going to revert? ==

	If that is the case, then we need to focus on the article structure and therefore the lead. If we are clear about the lead, then the article will flow from it. Is it O.K. to start working on the article again? ] 21:03, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

	:I just ran a text analyzer on the text of the current version of the CG article and it says that it contains 45,814 bytes. So, I think that we can proceed. Will you work on the lead? -- ] (]) 21:09, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

	::O.K. but with feedback from you. Perhaps there does need to be a separate section/article on Che as author since (to me) publishing details do not need to be in main body of article (later collected & published by such and such publishing house after his death). (Just my opinion -- no big deal.) Also, if Sandy objected to BBC News, then surely she would object to Time Magazine as a source of the details of his death, etc. ] 21:24, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

	:::I think that a summary section on him as author would be a good idea. Probably something similar to the "Legacy" section that we are hoping someone will create in the main CG article, and then another sub-article. Perhaps Redthoreau will want to work on the sub-article since CG's role as author, etc. seems to be of particular interest to him.

	:::re sources for details of his death, I have ''The Fall of Che Guevara'' by Ryan and can find information for you there; also, you might want to take a look at by Selvage. -- ] (]) 21:58, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

	:::Yes, that is a great source that I have used often. However, I do not know specifics about Guevara's writings. Quotes from that source:
	{{quotation\|Frequent comparisons are made between Guevara's theories and
	those expounded by Mao Tse Tung. Certainly, common to both are the
	tactics of fighting the enemy and the use ot the countryside as a base
	of operations.}}

	I have a whole book on the theme that Castro succeeded precisely because his revolution moved to the cities (not because of Castro though but through Frank Pais and others).

	{{quotation\|Although Che's prestige among third world countries reached
	new heights as he became one of the world's primary spokesmen for
	revolutionary change, his support in Cuba steadily diminished.}}

	But it is Cuba's revolution that succeeded.

	{{quotation\|Che's unorthodox theories for conducting revolutions, his critical stance towards the Soviet's
	"peaceful coexistence" efforts, and his preference for China's foreign relations policies inevitably placed him in jeopardy of falling into disfavor.}}

	This paper has a lot on Che's theories but gives only one publication in the bibliography. Nor does it discuss his writing style and other authorship qualities. Reading Che's theories, so different from the pragmatism of Castro, shows clearly (to me) why Castro could succeed and Che could not. He was rooted in past revolutionary styles. It almost makes him sound like a ]-like figure, or maybe he is ] with an ]. It says that Castro did not make attempts to indoctrinate his troops, while Che was all about indoctrination.

	I don't know what to put in the lead, other than he wrote a lot about revolutionary theory. I know he influenced Castro on ] but that was in person in Mexico or through Raul. Any ideas? Or maybe you should write that paragraph. ] 23:10, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

	:I tried to take care of it with a few words. Please tell me what you think ... -- ] (]) 00:14, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

	== Discussion on lead - opinions ==

	I replace first para in lead to a more concise version from a previous version.

	Later I found this one had been approved by talk page (December 3, 2006):
	{{quotation\|'''Ernesto Guevara de la Serna''' (], ] – ], ]), commonly known as '''Che Guevara''' or '''el Che,''' was an ] ] revolutionary, ], and leader of ] and ] ]s. As a young man studying ], Guevara traveled rough throughout ], bringing him into direct contact with the ] in which many people lived. His experiences and observations during these trips led him to the conclusion that the region's socioeconomic inequalities could only be remedied by revolution, prompting him to intensify his study of Marxism and travel to ] to learn about the reforms being implemented there by President ].}}

	It is a little more wordy, unnecessarily so from my point of view, but still very much O.K. Do others have opinions? ] 21:59, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

	::The first sentence of the version above is more correct and I would suggest using it. Other than that, I like your more concise treatment of the subject matter and would prefer retaining it. (In any case, the segment about guerrillas needs to be changed because he did not lead only Cuban guerrillas ...) -- ] (]) 22:51, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

	:::O.K. ] <small>—Preceding ] was added at 23:11, 28 February 2008 (UTC)</small><!--Template:Undated--> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

	::::Mattisse, I like it very much now. -- ] (]) 23:47, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

	:::::I understand your reasons. I just have a dislike of deceptive links. When the reader hovers over them or clicks them they see the real name anyway, so unless there is a really good reason, I think that wikilink names should accurately reflect there content. ] 00:13, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

	::::::After I added the mention about his writings, it became possible to move the wikilink, so I think all is well now (?) -- ] (]) 00:19, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

	:::::::Looks good. What do you want to tackle next? The footnotes are in bad condition and we need to settle on a format and fix them. Also, should I go back and try to reincorporate section you wrote that got distorted? ] 00:36, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

	::::::::I would prefer to make certain that most changes needed in the text have been made before we address the footnote issue because otherwise we may spend time working on footnotes that subsequently are not needed. -- ] (]) 01:12, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

	::::::::I am not sure which section you are referring to in relation to possible reincorporating. -- ] (]) 01:14, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

	== What footnote format are we using? ==

	There seem to be a variety in the article. I wanted to put an ISBN but I couldn't tell where to put it in the format. ] 00:32, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

	:Back when I was adding source notes to this article, WP policy was that you should have a notes section and a bibliography section and ISBNs only appeared in the bibliography section. At some point, rather recently, an editor wiped out the bibliography section of this article in order to give more prominence to external links, videos, etc. I have no idea where ISBNs are supposed to be located if the bibliography section is going to be integrated into the notes section. However, I would hazard a guess that they should go at the very end of the reference. I have looked at a few articles that recently received FA status and, so far, have found that all of them have both a notes section and a bibliography section. -- ] (]) 00:49, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

	::As far as I know, separate notes and "references" (not usually "bibliography") is still quite acceptable, and works well for articles that cite a lot of books. If we are doing that {{tl\|Harvnb}} in the notes and {{tl\|citation}} in the references works nicely: footnote has author, date, and page (plus anything else you want to append), and the author + date is a link to the appropriate entry in the references. - ] \| ] 00:56, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

	:::Here is a to a version of the CG article where the "References" section was still included. -- ] (]) 00:58, 29 February 2008 (UTC); -- ] (]) 04:44, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
	::::I brought the "References" from that version into the current article -- if it is not needed, please delete it. -- ] (]) 04:53, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

	== Rugby cat ==

	I have put Che down as an Argentine rugby player. This is not a troll, since he was actually a keen player and edited a fanzine in his time. --] (]) 13:51, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

	== ~~Nickname~~ ==		== Views in Argentina ==

			I travelled extensively in Argentina and the views on Guevara were unanimous; he is rarely mentioned there and is certainly not a source of pride. Many I met described him as a "psychopath" who enjoyed killing people. He apparently told his father that he "enjoyed the smell of cordite and blood" after he had shot someone through the head.
	There are three different places in the text where Guevara is described as being given a "nickname". Is there some reason for this propensity for being given nicknames? Are all of them important enough to warrant mention? I can see how "pig" and "Che" contribute to his characterization, but is the rugby nickname also important? Is its mention to establish that as a young man he was aggressive? ] <small>—Preceding ] was added at 15:55, 29 February 2008 (UTC)</small><!--Template:Undated--> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
			Not sure if this is worth extra exploration. ] (]) 17:03, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

			:It definitely isn't, I for one know plenty of Argentinians that are in awe of Guevara. Hearsay is not worth being mentioned on Misplaced Pages. ] (]) 12:45, 22 October 2023 (UTC)
	:I think that the intention was to show his enthusiasm for the game (which was great) and, as you say, to mention that he played very aggressively. I will leave it to others to give opinions as to whether its inclusion is warranted. -- ] (]) 16:29, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
			::Che was a psychopath who enjoyed killing people. He was also a homophobic and racist who hated black people. This is not hearsay. He publicly executed innocent Cubans by gunshot in front of many witnesses as a warning to anyone who tried to oppose their new government. ] (]) 11:55, 25 December 2023 (UTC)
			<s>Striking out material from block evader.</s> ] (]) 00:23, 22 March 2024 (UTC)
			:{{ping\|Grandpallama}} Although I agree that the heresay is irrelevant to our article, I looked at the IP and saw no evidence of block evasion. Is there a link that shows it? If so, it would be helpful if that is mentioned on the IP's talk page in case that editor continues making edits. --] (]) 00:39, 22 March 2024 (UTC)
			::], the editor is unlikely to show up with this particular IP again, as it's not static. That said, it's been pointed out to me that the age of the edit is such that I'm probably causing confusion more than helping (which makes sense); I only noticed today that he'd become active again for a while last year and was clearly overzealous ]. I've reverted my strikethrough. ] (]) 06:25, 22 March 2024 (UTC)
			:::Okay. --] (]) 06:28, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

			== Che was a mass murderer ==
	== Guatemala section ==

			Please add that Che Guevara was a mass murderer in the first sentence of this article. He should be put in the same category as Hitler. the sentence should read as follows:
	The Guatemala section has ballooned from the August, 2006 version. Some of the additions may be valuable and those should remain. However, from my point of view, the section is filled with so much detail that it is difficult to follow. I also wonder about mentioning events in that section that have not happened yet such as the '']''. To a general reader who may not know the history, will this make much sense to them? (I know this statement was in the March 10, 2006 version, but still I question it's inclusion here.)

			was an Argentine ] Mass Murderer, physician, author, ] leader, diplomat, and ]. ] (]) 04:00, 19 December 2023 (UTC)
	What do the rest of you think? ] 16:20, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

			:When was he convicted of being a mass murderer? ] (]) 05:39, 19 December 2023 (UTC)
	:I agree with you. The bit about the Granma expeditionary was added by a problematic editor who is no longer active. I would suggest that you clean this section up and then some of us can read your text and recommend additions if we think that anything essential has been removed. -- ] (]) 16:40, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
			::in Cuba he lined up innocent people against a wall “pared” and executed them without a trial for the public to witness. My Cuban family witnessed these executions and knew people who disappeared. He forced at gunpoint the removal of families from their homes. The only way to enforce socialism is to take away everything the people own by execution and physical violence. No one will willingly give the government their possessions. What I stated are facts. ] (]) 11:51, 25 December 2023 (UTC)
			:::Then it shouldn't be hard for you to provide some reliable sources here. Facts aren't hard to find in reliable sources. ] (]) 12:48, 25 December 2023 (UTC)
			::::Lots of sources exist, but they're very easy for you to ignore. ] (]) 01:23, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
			:::::If you have sources, ]. ] (]) 00:46, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
			::::::Alvaro Vargas LLosa, ''The Killing Machine; Che Guevara, from Communist Firebrand to Capitalist Brand" (Independent Insitiute:July 11, 2005, https://www.independent.org/news/article.asp?id=1535)
			::::::Guillermina Stutter Schneider. "Che Was a Racist, Homophobe, and Mass Murderer" (Human Progress: December 15, 2017, https://humanprogress.org/the-truth-about-che-guevara-racist-homophobe-and-mass-murderer/)
			::::::Troy J. Sacquety, "Che Guevara: A False Idol for Revolutionaries" (U.S Army Special Forces Command History Office: 2008, https://arsof-history.org/articles/v4n4_false_idol_page_1.html#fn:2)
			::::::These three sources support the idea that Che was ruthless, brutal, and guilty of more than enough human rights violations to earn multiple in-depth paragraphs for this article.
			::::::] (]) 23:39, 29 December 2024 (UTC)

			== Semantic Error ==
	::Perhaps I should mention that the editor in question is no longer active on WP because he has been blocked — one of the reasons being his habit of inserting text and then adamantly refusing to let others modify it, as was the case with the sentences you are referencing. -- ] (]) 16:47, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

			<ref></ref>{{Edit semi-protected\|Che Guevara\|answered=yes}}
	== Quotes ==
			Please change "Cause of death Execution by shooting" to
			"Cause of death Elimination by shooting"

			Che Guevara's capture and immediate execution without a legal trial would be more accurately described as an extrajudicial killing which is considered a form of murder. This differs from a lawful execution which typically involves a formal trial. ] (]) 05:31, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
	I notice that the article has just picked up a huge quantity of "Quotes", including some that have errors. I believe that it is WP policy that only a few quotes, if any, should be included in the article itself and that the others belong in Wikiquote (where a CG "quotes page" already exists and many of these can be found.) Does this policy remain in effect? -- ] (]) 16:36, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
			:{{done}}<!-- Template:ESp --> I replaced it with ] (per what's covered in the article's body). ] (]) 15:17, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
	:Per ] I think you are right.--] 17:37, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
			::Can you also take care of the "Battles/wars" section, where he was labeled to be executed after a conviction. ] (]) 10:21, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

			== Interview with Tucker Carlson - Ex-CIA Agent Felix Rodriguez on Che Guevara death ==
	== Question re the "Cuba" section ==
			Ex-CIA Agent on Capturing Che Guevara, Who Truly Killed JFK, and Election Predictions

			https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bwohQJrJeo8&ab_channel=TuckerCarlson
	A statement has recently been added to this section which I do not believe is adequately sourced, i.e.:

			] was executed in 1967 in a remote Bolivian village. One of the last people to speak to him alive was CIA officer ]. Here’s his story.
	:(Guevara) '''taught on the medical faculty of the National University (UNAM)'''

			Felix Rodriguez worked for the CIA until 1976.
	The source note given links to a dead URL. I do not remember ever having heard before that he was a member of the medical faculty of UNAM. Can anybody help with this? -- ] (]) 17:48, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

			] (]) 16:38, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
	== Plagiarism warning ==

			:That's not a reliable source. ] (]) 16:57, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
	The "Capture and execution" sub-section contains the following sentence:
			::It is his own testimony!!! ] (]) 16:58, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
			:::That's not how ] works. ] (]) 16:59, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
			::::Edit conflict, "please provide the acronym that supports your logic". LOL. ] (]) 17:01, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
			::::Specifically see points 1 and 2:
			::::{{tq\|1. The material is neither unduly self-serving nor an exceptional claim 2. It does not involve claims about third parties;}} ] (]) 17:01, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
			::::::Wow, you know how to make pretty colored text. I am impressed. LOL. Thanks for making my day, ] LOL. ] (]) 17:02, 7 May 2024 (UTC)

			;South Park: Officer Barbrady - There's nothing to see here.
	::'''The autopsy cited eight bullet wounds, but none to the face that would soon be flashed across the globe.'''

			https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LW6RWSiR88s&ab_channel=MiamiBadBoyBOSS
	Since this sentence is a verbatim copy of a sentence in the ''Los Angeles Times'' article, (to which it is sourced), I would suggest that it either be enclosed in quotes or, preferably, removed. -- ] (]) 19:05, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

	~~: Just paraphrase it. -~~ ] \| ] 20:32, 29 ~~February~~ ~~2008~~ (UTC)		] (]) 18:37, 7 May 2024 (UTC)

			== Lies & propaganda surrounding Che. ==
	== Executing the innocent ? ==

			https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/che-guevara-executing-women/
	Even though this sentence has a citation from Anderson on PBS I think it should go: "Che biographer Jon Lee Anderson has contended that through his five years of research that he was unable to find a single credible source pointing to a case where Che executed an innocent."

			Example number 1: The link listed above where the accusation of him “Killing 2 woman” came out including him being accused of being a mass murderer (which is false, the people executed weren't innocent and were those working with Batista, war criminals etc.
	My reason is that I don't know what "an innocent" means in war. Anderson says: "Those persons executed by Guevara or on his orders were condemned for the usual crimes punishable by death at times of war or in its aftermath: desertion, treason or crimes such as rape, torture or murder." Are we to believe there were trials and such? Did not he execute people for the same reasons he was executed? We do have to reduce the POV of this article. I know there are references for the "Christ-like" pose and such, but is that not POV? Interjecting religion into an article about someone who was definately not religious and who is controversial. In fact, did not the lead at one time say he was controversial? The globalsecurity.org article says in the introduction that he was controversial.

			Example number 2: The accusation that he was responsible for the UMAP camps/Imprisonment of homosexuals.
	Also, they makes it clear that their view is that Che was a failure in trying to implement his theory.
			in 1965 Che resigned his position as minister of industries and went to the Congo. He wasn't in Cuba during the operations of the camps and nor was he involved, Castro later took accountability for these camps stating how he failed the LGBT community in Cuba. ] (]) 16:40, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

			== Category:Stalinism ==
	This is their introduction:
	{{quotation\|Ernesto "Che" Guevara ranks as one of the most significant
	revolutionaries of the 20th century. After rising to power in
	Fidel Castro's revolutionary government, Che Guevara attained
	international status as a spokesman for radical social progress.
	His manual, Che Guevara on Guerrilla Warfare, introduced the foco
	theory of revolutions and remains one of the classic dissertations
	on guerrilla warfare. Che's attempt, however, to personally implement his foco theory in Bolivia during 1966-1967 failed completely
	and resulted in his death.}}

			Obviously Che was supportive of Stalin at one point, and maybe throughout his life? I'm not an expert. However I don't think this was a "defining characteristic," as laid out in ]. The article mentions Stalin once but doesn't really make clear Che's connection to Stalinism or why the category is there. I'm removing it. ] (]) 13:03, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
	] 20:43, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 13:03, 31 December 2024

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Che Guevara article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22Auto-archiving period: 2 months

This

level-4 vital article is rated GA-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects.

Biography: Military / Politics and Government / Core

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Misplaced Pages's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
	This article is supported by the military biography work group (assessed as Top-importance).
	This article is supported by the politics and government work group (assessed as Top-importance).
	This article is listed on the project's core biographies page.

Socialism Top‑importance

	Socialism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Socialism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of socialism on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SocialismWikipedia:WikiProject SocialismTemplate:WikiProject Socialismsocialism
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Military history: Biography / South America / Cold War

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history

Associated task forces:
/
	Military biography task force
	South American military history task force
	Cold War task force (c. 1945 – c. 1989)

Argentina Top‑importance

	Argentina portal This article is part of WikiProject Argentina, an attempt to expand, improve and standardise the content and structure of articles related to Argentine history. If you would like to participate, you can improve Che Guevara, or sign up and contribute to a wider array of articles like those on our to do list.ArgentinaWikipedia:WikiProject ArgentinaTemplate:WikiProject ArgentinaArgentine
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Cuba Top‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cuba, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Cuba related articles on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CubaWikipedia:WikiProject CubaTemplate:WikiProject CubaCuba

Top

This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Cuba task list:

Task list

New article announcements:
Requests: Ambrosio Cave, Calero Cave, Centella Cave, Cuba and the United Nations, Cuevas de Punta del Este, Cura Cave, Patana Cave, Pluma Cave
Stubs: Dollar store (Cuba)
Verify: History of Cuba, Fulgencio Batista
Update: Nochebuena
NPOV: Armando Valladares, Delfín Fernández, History of Cuba
Copyedit: Armando Peraza, Bay of Pigs Invasion, Fabio Grobart, Julio Antonio Mella
Cleanup: Abelardo Colomé Ibarra, Antonio Maceo Grajales, Bay of Pigs Invasion, History of Cuba, List of Cubans, Máximo Gómez, War against the Bandits
Style: Fidel Castro
Expand: Cuba–Soviet Union relations, Baseball in Cuba, Religion in Cuba, Havana's International Book Fair, Cuba–Venezuela relations, Antonio Sánchez de Bustamante y Sirven

Caribbean High‑importance

	Caribbean portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Caribbean, an attempt to build a comprehensive guide to the countries of the Caribbean on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. If you are new to editing Misplaced Pages visit the welcome page to become familiar with the guidelines.CaribbeanWikipedia:WikiProject CaribbeanTemplate:WikiProject CaribbeanCaribbean
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Basque

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Basque, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Basque Country, Basque people, Basque language, history and culture on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BasqueWikipedia:WikiProject BasqueTemplate:WikiProject BasqueBasque
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

Politics Mid‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Atheism Mid‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Atheism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of atheism on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AtheismWikipedia:WikiProject AtheismTemplate:WikiProject AtheismAtheism

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

For more information and how you can help, click the link opposite:

If you would like to participate, you can edit this article and visit the project page.

Quick help

Recent activity

To do

Join WikiProject atheism and be bold.

Add a userbox to your page ({{User WikiProject Atheism}} or {{User WPA2}}) and attract potential members.
Help with articles.
See this month's adopt-an-article.
Help out with this to-do list.

Be consistent

Use a "standard" layout for atheism-related articles (see layout style, "The perfect article" and Featured articles).
Add Atheism info box to all atheism related talk pages (use {{WikiProject Atheism}} or see info box)
Ensure atheism-related articles are members of Atheism by checking whether ] has been added to atheism-related articles – and, where it hasn't, adding it.

Maintenance, etc.

Find sources for all positions of an article (see Citing sources and atheism references).
Try to expand stubs. Ideas and theories about life, however, are prone to generating neologisms, so some stubs may be suitable for deletion (see deletion process).
Watch the list of atheism-related articles and add to accordingly.
Always write for an encyclopedia.

Articles to improve

Agnosticism

Create

Articles on notable atheists

Expand

an atheism stub

Immediate attention

State atheism needs a reassessment of its Importance level, as it has little to do with atheism and is instead an article about anti-theist/anti-religious actions of governments.
False choice into False dilemma: discuss whether you are for or against this merge here
Clarify references in Atheism using footnotes.
Secular movement defines it as a being restricted to America in the 21st century.

Bolivia Mid‑importance

	Bolivia portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Bolivia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of all Bolivia-related articles on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BoliviaWikipedia:WikiProject BoliviaTemplate:WikiProject BoliviaBolivia
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is featured on the Bolivia Portal selected article section.

History

	History portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the subject of History on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Historyhistory
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

This page is not a forum for general discussion about Che Guevara. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Che Guevara at the Reference desk.

Che Guevara is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed.

Che Guevara has been listed as one of the Social sciences and society good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

This article appeared on Misplaced Pages's Main Page as Today's featured article on June 18, 2006.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
August 3, 2004	Featured article candidate	Not promoted
September 3, 2004	Featured article candidate	Not promoted
December 16, 2005	Peer review	Reviewed
December 19, 2005	Good article nominee	Listed
March 10, 2006	Featured article candidate	Promoted
April 23, 2008	Featured article review	Demoted
August 28, 2009	Good article nominee	Listed
Facts from this article were featured on Misplaced Pages's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on October 8, 2004, October 8, 2005, October 8, 2006, October 7, 2009, October 7, 2010, October 8, 2011, October 8, 2013, October 8, 2017, October 8, 2019, and October 8, 2022.
Current status: Former featured article, current good article

Views in Argentina

I travelled extensively in Argentina and the views on Guevara were unanimous; he is rarely mentioned there and is certainly not a source of pride. Many I met described him as a "psychopath" who enjoyed killing people. He apparently told his father that he "enjoyed the smell of cordite and blood" after he had shot someone through the head. Not sure if this is worth extra exploration. 86.153.86.158 (talk) 17:03, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

It definitely isn't, I for one know plenty of Argentinians that are in awe of Guevara. Hearsay is not worth being mentioned on Misplaced Pages. 2A02:1811:C1F:8200:3564:4278:E78B:F860 (talk) 12:45, 22 October 2023 (UTC)

Che was a psychopath who enjoyed killing people. He was also a homophobic and racist who hated black people. This is not hearsay. He publicly executed innocent Cubans by gunshot in front of many witnesses as a warning to anyone who tried to oppose their new government. Hectorgavilla (talk) 11:55, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

~~Striking out material from block evader.~~ Grandpallama (talk) 00:23, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

@Grandpallama: Although I agree that the heresay is irrelevant to our article, I looked at the IP and saw no evidence of block evasion. Is there a link that shows it? If so, it would be helpful if that is mentioned on the IP's talk page in case that editor continues making edits. --David Tornheim (talk) 00:39, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

David Tornheim, the editor is unlikely to show up with this particular IP again, as it's not static. That said, it's been pointed out to me that the age of the edit is such that I'm probably causing confusion more than helping (which makes sense); I only noticed today that he'd become active again for a while last year and was clearly overzealous in wanting to scrub his unproductive contributions. I've reverted my strikethrough. Grandpallama (talk) 06:25, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

Okay. --David Tornheim (talk) 06:28, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

Che was a mass murderer

Please add that Che Guevara was a mass murderer in the first sentence of this article. He should be put in the same category as Hitler. the sentence should read as follows:

was an Argentine Marxist Mass Murderer, physician, author, guerrilla leader, diplomat, and military theorist. Hectorgavilla (talk) 04:00, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

When was he convicted of being a mass murderer? HiLo48 (talk) 05:39, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

in Cuba he lined up innocent people against a wall “pared” and executed them without a trial for the public to witness. My Cuban family witnessed these executions and knew people who disappeared. He forced at gunpoint the removal of families from their homes. The only way to enforce socialism is to take away everything the people own by execution and physical violence. No one will willingly give the government their possessions. What I stated are facts. Hectorgavilla (talk) 11:51, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Then it shouldn't be hard for you to provide some reliable sources here. Facts aren't hard to find in reliable sources. StephenMacky1 (talk) 12:48, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Lots of sources exist, but they're very easy for you to ignore. 73.100.184.209 (talk) 01:23, 5 June 2024 (UTC)

If you have sources, WP:PROVEIT. Flounder fillet (talk) 00:46, 9 June 2024 (UTC)

Alvaro Vargas LLosa, The Killing Machine; Che Guevara, from Communist Firebrand to Capitalist Brand" (Independent Insitiute:July 11, 2005, https://www.independent.org/news/article.asp?id=1535)

Guillermina Stutter Schneider. "Che Was a Racist, Homophobe, and Mass Murderer" (Human Progress: December 15, 2017, https://humanprogress.org/the-truth-about-che-guevara-racist-homophobe-and-mass-murderer/)

Troy J. Sacquety, "Che Guevara: A False Idol for Revolutionaries" (U.S Army Special Forces Command History Office: 2008, https://arsof-history.org/articles/v4n4_false_idol_page_1.html#fn:2)

These three sources support the idea that Che was ruthless, brutal, and guilty of more than enough human rights violations to earn multiple in-depth paragraphs for this article.

Aldrich.Faithful (talk) 23:39, 29 December 2024 (UTC)

Semantic Error

Cite error: There are <ref> tags on this page without content in them (see the help page).

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Please change "Cause of death Execution by shooting" to "Cause of death Elimination by shooting"

Che Guevara's capture and immediate execution without a legal trial would be more accurately described as an extrajudicial killing which is considered a form of murder. This differs from a lawful execution which typically involves a formal trial. Thirdfemalelead (talk) 05:31, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

Done I replaced it with extrajudicial killing (per what's covered in the article's body). M.Bitton (talk) 15:17, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

Can you also take care of the "Battles/wars" section, where he was labeled to be executed after a conviction. LackOfInspiration1 (talk) 10:21, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

Interview with Tucker Carlson - Ex-CIA Agent Felix Rodriguez on Che Guevara death

Ex-CIA Agent on Capturing Che Guevara, Who Truly Killed JFK, and Election Predictions

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bwohQJrJeo8&ab_channel=TuckerCarlson

Che Guevara was executed in 1967 in a remote Bolivian village. One of the last people to speak to him alive was CIA officer Felix Rodriguez (former CIA agent). Here’s his story.

Felix Rodriguez worked for the CIA until 1976.

Ironcurtain2 (talk) 16:38, 7 May 2024 (UTC)

That's not a reliable source. Simonm223 (talk) 16:57, 7 May 2024 (UTC)

It is his own testimony!!! Ironcurtain2 (talk) 16:58, 7 May 2024 (UTC)

That's not how WP:ABOUTSELF works. Simonm223 (talk) 16:59, 7 May 2024 (UTC)

Edit conflict, "please provide the acronym that supports your logic". LOL. Ironcurtain2 (talk) 17:01, 7 May 2024 (UTC)

Specifically see points 1 and 2:

1. The material is neither unduly self-serving nor an exceptional claim 2. It does not involve claims about third parties; Simonm223 (talk) 17:01, 7 May 2024 (UTC)

Wow, you know how to make pretty colored text. I am impressed. LOL. Thanks for making my day, User:Simonm223 LOL. Ironcurtain2 (talk) 17:02, 7 May 2024 (UTC)

South Park: Officer Barbrady - There's nothing to see here.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LW6RWSiR88s&ab_channel=MiamiBadBoyBOSS

Ironcurtain2 (talk) 18:37, 7 May 2024 (UTC)

Lies & propaganda surrounding Che.

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/che-guevara-executing-women/

Example number 1: The link listed above where the accusation of him “Killing 2 woman” came out including him being accused of being a mass murderer (which is false, the people executed weren't innocent and were those working with Batista, war criminals etc.

Example number 2: The accusation that he was responsible for the UMAP camps/Imprisonment of homosexuals. in 1965 Che resigned his position as minister of industries and went to the Congo. He wasn't in Cuba during the operations of the camps and nor was he involved, Castro later took accountability for these camps stating how he failed the LGBT community in Cuba. Sproogli (talk) 16:40, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Category:Stalinism

Obviously Che was supportive of Stalin at one point, and maybe throughout his life? I'm not an expert. However I don't think this was a "defining characteristic," as laid out in Misplaced Pages:CATDEF. The article mentions Stalin once but doesn't really make clear Che's connection to Stalinism or why the category is there. I'm removing it. Prezbo (talk) 13:03, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

Categories: