| Revision as of 00:35, 17 February 2017 editTheTimesAreAChanging (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users23,372 editsm Grammar.← Previous edit | Revision as of 00:51, 17 February 2017 edit undoGuccisamsclub (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users3,333 edits reNext edit → | ||
| Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
| You've done a complete rewrite of the entire section, deleting material for no good reason in the process. It may satisfy BLP (speak well of American officials) but it does not satisfy NPOV by any stretch of the imagination. You should restore the previous version and add your preferred narrative: the place where Steve Coll is quoted is the a very good place to do so. You winner take all strategy is not going to work. ] (]) 00:25, 17 February 2017 (UTC) | You've done a complete rewrite of the entire section, deleting material for no good reason in the process. It may satisfy BLP (speak well of American officials) but it does not satisfy NPOV by any stretch of the imagination. You should restore the previous version and add your preferred narrative: the place where Steve Coll is quoted is the a very good place to do so. You winner take all strategy is not going to work. ] (]) 00:25, 17 February 2017 (UTC) | ||
| :{{Ping|Guccisamsclub}} I would advise you to take a closer look, and tell me, <u>specifically</u>, what was wrongly deleted. The cite kill is still there. The Brzezinski quote is still there. The Slocombe quote is still there. The stuff about Gulbuddin Hekmatyar is still there. Literally all I deleted was "''Some scholars also view the action as following from Brzezinski’s aspiration of using Islamic fundamentalism to counter the global left''" and "''By the end of 1980, out of the 80,000 soldiers strong Afghan Army, more than half had either deserted or joined the rebels.''" I thought, and still think, the latter sentence was out of place. You previously criticized the former as a ] view, but if you want to put it back in, by all means.] (]) 00:32, 17 February 2017 (UTC) | :{{Ping|Guccisamsclub}} I would advise you to take a closer look, and tell me, <u>specifically</u>, what was wrongly deleted. The cite kill is still there. The Brzezinski quote is still there. The Slocombe quote is still there. The stuff about Gulbuddin Hekmatyar is still there. Literally all I deleted was "''Some scholars also view the action as following from Brzezinski’s aspiration of using Islamic fundamentalism to counter the global left''" and "''By the end of 1980, out of the 80,000 soldiers strong Afghan Army, more than half had either deserted or joined the rebels.''" I thought, and still think, the latter sentence was out of place. You previously criticized the former as a ] view, but if you want to put it back in, by all means.] (]) 00:32, 17 February 2017 (UTC) | ||
| ::Yeah, I was reading the wikitext and missed some things. You're right—most of it is there. However, the excessive reliance on partisan primary sources, together with their rhetoric, does violate DUE, NPOV. I'll check back later. ] (]) 00:51, 17 February 2017 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 00:51, 17 February 2017
afghan-soviet war
You've done a complete rewrite of the entire section, deleting material for no good reason in the process. It may satisfy BLP (speak well of American officials) but it does not satisfy NPOV by any stretch of the imagination. You should restore the previous version and add your preferred narrative: the place where Steve Coll is quoted is the a very good place to do so. You winner take all strategy is not going to work. Guccisamsclub (talk) 00:25, 17 February 2017 (UTC)
- @Guccisamsclub: I would advise you to take a closer look, and tell me, specifically, what was wrongly deleted. The cite kill is still there. The Brzezinski quote is still there. The Slocombe quote is still there. The stuff about Gulbuddin Hekmatyar is still there. Literally all I deleted was "Some scholars also view the action as following from Brzezinski’s aspiration of using Islamic fundamentalism to counter the global left" and "By the end of 1980, out of the 80,000 soldiers strong Afghan Army, more than half had either deserted or joined the rebels." I thought, and still think, the latter sentence was out of place. You previously criticized the former as a WP:FRINGE view, but if you want to put it back in, by all means.TheTimesAreAChanging (talk) 00:32, 17 February 2017 (UTC)
- Yeah, I was reading the wikitext and missed some things. You're right—most of it is there. However, the excessive reliance on partisan primary sources, together with their rhetoric, does violate DUE, NPOV. I'll check back later. Guccisamsclub (talk) 00:51, 17 February 2017 (UTC)