Talk:Venezuela will buy Spanish planes with European technology

This article is filled with anti-US agendas. it should be cleaned of P.O.V.

Not sure I see the POV issues in the article as too serious, if the U.S. responds, it'll be included. But colons are bad in titles, the colon should be replaces with "says the". Nyarlathotep 14:49, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

The article summarises news that are avilable in Spanish (El Universal of Caracas) and went unreported in English. No agenda at all.--Tequendamia 06:34, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

I agree with Nyarlathotep (earlier, I thought the issues were minimal, however they are quite prevalent now). Please clean this up in accordiance with the NPOV policy. A side note to Neutralizer: your edit was not made in accordiance with the NPOV policy. Further violation of this policy may result in a block. --MrMiscellanious (talk) – 16:42, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

Your claims are baseless Mrmiscellanious. What is your agenda?--Tequendamia 18:49, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

MrM. what edit are you referring to? And please stop the threats to force article content to be the way you want it. Neutralizer 19:12, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

You guys are trying to supress and censor part of the news just because you don't like it. Every supression needs to be justfify. I have added the sources in the article. Everything is supported.--Tequendamia 18:57, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

Is this story out of date already?

BBC reported on January 13th that the say was finalised and would happen: [1]

Albeit with non-US parts. This should be mentioned. Bill3 20:40, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

NPOV question

In its current state, this article appears to be quite neutral to me. If the tagger would please examine it and list any additional actionable NPOV concerns I would appreciate it. - Amgine | ^{talk en.WN} 19:03, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

The statement "Appears" lacks objectivity and it clearly a reflects personal opinion. Is this piece of news unconfortable? Are we becoming "Fair and balanced" instead of "Fair and accurate"?--Tequendamia 19:09, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

Neither I nor anyone else can claim absolute objectivity when examining an article. It is considered standard on Wikinews to request the tagger to review where there is dispute before a tag is removed, and that a tagger must provide actionable critiques. - Amgine | ^{talk en.WN} 19:28, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

Claims need to be properly justified otherwise they are vandalism.--Tequendamia 19:30, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

"The announcement states that the ban is an evidence of the double speech of George W. Bush and formulates the question: Do they want to combat or to control the illegal drug trade?."...This is more like a writers opinion. I think it needs to be re-worded a little...maybe put...Do they want to combat or to control the illegal drug trade?....as a quote by Bush? ALSO...this is DEF and opinion..."The republic of Venezuela is the country where most of the drug seizing occurs as its geographic position makes it the natural route of illegal drug trade from the South America to the US...It should say something like.... It's believed that Venezuela is where most of the drug production occurs primarily because of its mountainous region and geographic location which makes it a prime route for illegal drug trade from South America to the U.S.....Just a suggestion before i think the rest of the article will be ok to go, in my opinion anyways. Dragonfire1024 is Jason Safoutin 20:24, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

The controversial piece of news

"The communique casts doubts about the real intentions of the US ban on the military planes sale and accuses the US of undermining Venezuela’s response capacity to deal with this threat. The announcement states that the ban is an evidence of the double speech of George W. Bush and formulates the question: Do they want to combat or to control the illegal drug trade?." This the part some want remove. This is a translation from the El Universal from Caracas.--Tequendamia 19:12, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

The first sentence above is a point of view. There are other ways it could be written which do not state as a fact that there are doubts, that there are "real intentions", or that there is a threat to be dealt with. If you can ascribe this sentence, for example "El Universal from Caracas reports the communique casts doubts about..." this would solve the problem. - Amgine | ^{talk en.WN} 19:34, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

Don't destroy information that is supported.--Tequendamia 19:35, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

I agree with Amigine. DragonFire1024 is Jason Safoutin 19:43, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

I suspect there is a case of one person using many accounts here to appear as many users. I am denouncing that here. All claims of POV have had the same style and none of them have stated reasons--Tequendamia 19:45, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

You are wrong. I am what my user page says. I am simply disputing you way of writing the article. You go totally towards one side, venezuela. I am sensing a little anti-US. You should put "Reports say the communique..." or "So-and-So reports/said...etc...". you have to keep an open mind when writing news and expand on ALL sides. DragonFire1024 is Jason Safoutin

This is not longer a news article

Information from original sources in Spanish was removed and the title changed many times. Therefore the article initially published and its information is no longer provided. Call it sexed-up news.--Tequendamia 21:27, 18 January 2006 (UTC)