Jump to content

Talk:Gastón Mansilla Yupanqui

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

About the NPOV mark Although the article does cite facts and includes references, there are so many opiniating terms in it that the point of view in my opinion cannot be considered neutral. Examples of this: "unjustly arrested", "outraged". The large part about all the demonstrations that were held obscures the neutral facts in the case. Pe1pbu (talk) 20:46, 13 January 2012 (UTC) We have removed the "outraged" and "unjustly" words and have included the Judge's defense of her actions along with appropriate links. A request was placed on Pe1pbu's talk page requesting him to return to the article and review it and/or to recommend improvements.Peru Serv (talk) 13:47, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

After the changes made and described above, I have removed the NPOV tag. Pe1pbu (talk) 22:33, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]


Well I, for one, am glad that the article has been moved as I made a mistake when I typed in the name. Personally, however, I think the article should be moved from Gastón Mansilla Yupanqui to Gastón Gabriel Mansilla Yupanqui and assuming that Sanquino75 is in agreement, I should like to get that process underway as soon as possible. As for the NPOV complaint, Sanquino75 put in the "unjustly" which I personally think is a fair characterization and which he amended to wrongfully. However, so as not to offend anyone, I took the word out entirely and instead added the tidbit that the judge has been suspended pending the investigation and threw in a quote from a classmate labeling her action as arbitrary. I was looking to work into the part about the judge being suspended the fact that the charge against her is for being arbitrary, but I couldn't get a good-sounding phrase. I also eliminated the word "outraged" in favor of "was immediately objected to" and I am seeking unanimous consent to remove the POV tag.Peru Serv (talk) 13:30, 14 January 2012 (UTC) I've noticed that we are using two different formats for the date, some of them January 7, 2012 others 7 January 2012. I recommend we standardize on one date format and convert the whole document to that format.Peru Serv (talk) 13:40, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]