This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia'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 within the scope of WikiProject Sweden, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Sweden-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SwedenWikipedia:WikiProject SwedenTemplate:WikiProject SwedenSweden
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.WomenWikipedia:WikiProject WomenTemplate:WikiProject WomenWikiProject Women
This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as stub, and the rating on other projects was brought up to Stub class. BetacommandBot05:41, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It seems a little odd that the Khmer Rouge controversy takes up more than a half of the article. This is not proportional to its importance - Dahl was behind a whole number of important political acts which had nothing to do with the Khmer Rouge controversy. For example, she was a leading figure in the ban of Corporal punishment in the home against children in 1979, that children's benefit be given to both parents not only the mother, and that tha 1965 law against rape within marriage should be used and not only be a paper product. To portray the Khmer Rouge controversy as if it was basically the main point of her entire political career, seem almost baised, and non-neutral. --Aciram (talk) 01:49, 2 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I may reduce the above subject in the article. It certainly merits a mention in the article, since it was indeed a controversy and should by no means be deleted, but it takes unwarranted room in the article and should be reduced in size in accordance to its importance. She had a long political career both before and after, but as it is know, half of the article is about that one controversy, which makes it look like the main thing in her entire career. It is not neutral point of view.--Aciram (talk) 15:28, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
