Talk:Gibraltar: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively ← Previous edit Next edit →Content deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 10:19, 4 September 2009 editSineBot (talk \| contribs)Bots2,555,318 editsm Signing comment by 89.129.39.103 - "→Article Overhaul: "← Previous edit		Revision as of 10:21, 4 September 2009 edit undoWee Curry Monster (talk \| contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers25,546 edits →Article Overhaul: respNext edit →
Line 40:		Line 40:

	::This article is amongst the most blatantly biased ones in all Misplaced Pages, along with those devoted to the ], ] and the ]. Give us a rest, you lot. And what JCRB says is true: why exactly a the "Jane’s Country Risk" ranking are placed in the lead section? Please, see ]: ''The lead should be able to stand alone as a concise overview of the article. It should define the topic, establish context, explain why the subject is interesting or notable, and summarize the most important points—including any notable controversies''. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 10:17, 4 September 2009 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->		::This article is amongst the most blatantly biased ones in all Misplaced Pages, along with those devoted to the ], ] and the ]. Give us a rest, you lot. And what JCRB says is true: why exactly a the "Jane’s Country Risk" ranking are placed in the lead section? Please, see ]: ''The lead should be able to stand alone as a concise overview of the article. It should define the topic, establish context, explain why the subject is interesting or notable, and summarize the most important points—including any notable controversies''. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 10:17, 4 September 2009 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

			UNINDENT

			Commenting on the OP, the talk page was archived, any discussion can be readily retrieved at any time. The bad faith accusation inherent in that comment was unhelpful.

			To the IP above, will you please cease with the accusations of bias. You are welcome to discuss changes in the article, not to indulge in bad faith attacks on editors. '']'' <small>'']''</small> 10:21, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Revision as of 10:21, 4 September 2009

Template:Outline of knowledge coverage

Skip to table of contents

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Gibraltar 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, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27

Template:V0.5

Software: Computing

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Software, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of software 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.SoftwareWikipedia:WikiProject SoftwareTemplate:WikiProject Softwaresoftware
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Computing.

This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Gibraltar Top‑importance

	Gibraltar portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Gibraltar, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Gibraltar and 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.GibraltarWikipedia:WikiProject GibraltarTemplate:WikiProject GibraltarGibraltar
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

United Kingdom High‑importance

	United Kingdom portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United Kingdom 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.United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject United KingdomUnited Kingdom
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Spain Mid‑importance

	Spain portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Spain, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Spain 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.SpainWikipedia:WikiProject SpainTemplate:WikiProject SpainSpain
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Military history: National / British / European

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

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	National militaries task force
	British military history task force
	European military history task force

A fact from this article was featured on Misplaced Pages's Main Page in the On this day section on August 4, 2004, April 30, 2005, April 30, 2006, April 30, 2007, August 4, 2007, September 10, 2007, September 10, 2008, and August 4, 2009.

Archives

Article Overhaul

Before somebody arbitrarily decided to archive the discussion page (July 09 - Aug 09) we were discussing how this article needs a major revision and reassessment, if not complete overhaul. It is written in a completely pro-British and anti-Spanish style and thus violates the Misplaced Pages principle of neutrality: WP:NPOV. Some good editors have tried to improve it by proposing small changes and additions to the article in the recent months, even years. However, their contributions have been repeatedly rejected and obstructed by some editors with an obvious pro-British bias. They impose their one-sided point of view with dishonesty, cynicism and even sarcasm. They prevent the article from being neutral and balanced by shoving aside constructive opinions and contributions. The result is a biased article which only reflects the British point of view.

For example, the British arguments in the sovereignty dispute are clearly presented at the top of the article. But there is no mention of the other side's point of view. It reads: "The overwhelming majority of Gibraltarians strongly oppose this along with any proposal of shared sovereignty. The British government has stated that it is committed to respecting the Gibraltarians' wishes." But then no mention of the basis of the Spanish claims: 1) territorial integrity, 2) UN Resolutions mandating decolonization, or 3) the debate about the "transfer of sovereignty" under the Treaty of Utrecht of 1713, by which property of the territory was transferred (real estate) not sovereignty.

In the latter part of the article, there is no mention either of the UN Resolution against the Referendum of 1967, or of the dispute on territorial waters, the shifting of the border by Britain, or the ilegal trafficking. But then, irrelevant information like the "Jane’s Country Risk" study is rammed into the Main Page (it helps create a positive impression of the colony) when no other country or region article in Misplaced Pages has this on their main page. The whole thing is so blunt in its pro-British bias it is ridiculous. Complete, neutral, verifiable information should be presented in this article, not selective facts that fit people's political points of view. Important facts like the Non-Self Governing status of Gibraltar, or the basis for Spain's claims should be included immediately to stop this bias and provide some neutrality to the article. JCRB (talk) 07:46, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Please desist from using insulting language referring to Gibraltar as 'a colony; is legally incorrect and most offensive. The article is about Gibraltar not a Spanish obsession. There is an article which deals with the dispute. It is not appropriate here. --Gibnews (talk) 08:09, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

The UN Decolonisation Committee is in fact discussed in this article. Nationalist rants merely confirm your own bias and lets be honest here, you and your sockpuppet MEGV tried and failed to introduce your edit last time. The IP sock puppet you appear to be using is unhelpful. Discuss your proposed edits in a reasonable manner, without the accusations of bias and you may get somewhere. But if you plan to spam the page with tendentious arguments as you did the last time you will get nowhere. Justin talk 08:38, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

This article is amongst the most blatantly biased ones in all Misplaced Pages, along with those devoted to the History of Gibraltar, Gibraltarian people and the Great Siege of Gibraltar. Give us a rest, you lot. And what JCRB says is true: why exactly a the "Jane’s Country Risk" ranking are placed in the lead section? Please, see WP:LEAD: The lead should be able to stand alone as a concise overview of the article. It should define the topic, establish context, explain why the subject is interesting or notable, and summarize the most important points—including any notable controversies. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.129.39.103 (talk) 10:17, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

UNINDENT

Commenting on the OP, the talk page was archived, any discussion can be readily retrieved at any time. The bad faith accusation inherent in that comment was unhelpful.

To the IP above, will you please cease with the accusations of bias. You are welcome to discuss changes in the article, not to indulge in bad faith attacks on editors. Justin talk 10:21, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Categories: