Wikipedia

Talk:National Popular Resistance Front

Latest comment: 13 years ago by Boud in topic citation needed
Learn more about this page

NPOV - "communists" edit

Latest comment: 13 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Wiki rules state: "Neutral point of view (NPOV) is a fundamental Wikimedia principle and a cornerstone of Wikipedia. All Wikipedia articles and other encyclopedic content must be written from a neutral point of view, representing fairly, and as far as possible without bias, all significant views that have been published by reliable sources. This is non-negotiable and expected of all articles and all editors."

The assertions contained in the paragraph go against this fundamental rule:

"Aims and composition

Frente Nacional contra el Golpe de Estado en Honduras is a wide coalition of communists, campesinos' organisations and other delinquent organisations, together with commie political parties and movements that have stated their opposition to the 2009 Honduran coup d'etat.[2][3] The aim of the FNGE[1] is to replace the de facto government of President Roberto Micheletti, which is perceived by the FNGE as a dictatorship, by restoring elected President Manuel Zelaya.[1]"

Now if Wiki doesn't get its act together it will lose what little credibility it retains. It is becoming a propaganda outlet for the powerful and rich global elites. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Esqueleto54 (talk • contribs) 11:21, 22 August 2009

You are referring to this edit which has now been undone. Please learn to use the "history" tab in your browser and the "compare version" button. i don't think NPOV was the main argument against that edit, but rather the arguments are:
  • There were no reliable sources given to support the claims that groups involved in FNGE are communists, nor that they are delinquent. Even if there were claims about the latter, they would have to be presented properly sourced and NPOV-ed in the article.
  • The URL (web address) to the FNGE web page was sabotaged by that user. S/he inserted an extra letter "e" so that someone who clicked on the link would find an error message and would not probably not notice the spelling error.
It's good that you brought the question up. Please learn about wikipedia methods and guidelines and remember that you too are allowed to edit! Incidentally, the IP of the person who made that edit is in San Pedro Sula. Boud (talk) 21:55, 22 August 2009 (UTC)Reply
  • This article really needs to be redone from a more neutral POV. It majorly shifts between full-on support and full-on hate of the movement. I live in Honduras and I tell you: the HRs have not changed at all since last year. "Misinformed by the media", you may say, but no, I mean, in less than courteous terms: the country was pretty much screwed before Zelaya, during Zelaya, and continues to be nowadays. Kill rates are sky high, but not really because of any political agenda. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.107.142.180 (talk) 02:30, 24 February 2011 (UTC)Reply

please provide reliable sources for the name change edit

Latest comment: 13 years ago12 comments3 people in discussion

This article orginally was titled Frente Nacional contra el Golpe de Estado en Honduras because that's in several articles and consistent with the horizontal words and the logo at the left in the overall-top-logo on the Front's main webpage - here is the logo.

The first line of the article at present still reads "El Frente Nacional de la Resistencia (English: National Resistance Front, EFNR[1])..." where the reference [1] gives FNGE as the abbreviation.

SqueakBox: i have no particular in-depth knowledge of the Frente to tell you what acronym they prefer, but if you want us to put "EFNR", then please provide a source. Communique 26, which is presently at the top of http://contraelgolpedeestadohn.blogspot.com/ presently says "El Frente Nacional de Resistencia Contra el Golpe de Estado", and i do seem to have seen "El Frente Nacional de Resistencia" or "El Frente de Resistencia" used in various sources, but i didn't note them down, so as far as wikipedia is concerned, they are irrelevant until (at a minimum) they are properly referenced.

Since the coalition is most likely a loose, horizontal coalition, it's probably not particularly worried about sticking with one particular name, but as part of documenting knowledge, we have to go by whatever documentary record is available...

In practice, we cannot repeat the full long name or a slashed name (A/B) in every sentence in the article where referring to the coalition is needed. One alternative to trying to use an acronym would be to use El Frente. Literally it just means "The Front", but the language difference would help make it clear what we are referring to. In English, "front" has a much more common meaning, so it doesn't seem to me to be a good idea to use "The Front" throughout the article - just in terms of readability.

Any thoughts? Boud (talk) 21:26, 2 October 2009 (UTC)Reply

Both names seem to be in use, see a google search, I dont think we should worry too much about the acronyms. Thanks, SqueakBox talk 20:42, 8 October 2009 (UTC)Reply
Google for me gives:
So the name that the group calls itself (admittedly ambiguous between their logo and the first line of text presently at the top of their website, i.e. in Communique 26) is only about four times as common as the alternative that you have suggested. However, the alternative that you suggest clearly is in common use and cannot be ignored, so we do need to include it with a reference. (SqueakBox: those numbers in square brackets are there for a good reason in wikipedia articles!) For the moment at least, i won't rush to revert the name change. It turns out the situation is more complex, as well.
The naming convention that seems closest to this case recommends that we should use the English translation unless the original is "widely used internationally". The guideline doesn't say what to do if the term is widely used in the international Spanish-language press, but little used in the English-language press, for sociopolitical reasons between different language-dominated regions. i guess we have to find what the English language press uses.
Firstly, without quotation marks, in order not to constraint the word order:
It seems that "National Resistance Front" is the most popular by far, even when "Front" is given to google as the first priority keyword. Also, requiring "coup" drops the number of entries by nearly an order of magnitude. WP:NAME does recommend using short, easy-to-find names that follow the pattern of similar articles.
These really should be repeated with quotation marks, but i'm going to be lazy and just try to get an estimate of relative (es) to (en) frequency:
So as i guessed, the National Resistance Front is at least 100 times less frequently reported in the English-language online material than in the Spanish-language online material. That does not decrease its notability: en.wikipedia.org is not the English-speaking-world Wikipedia. But it does suggest some original research that could be done outside of wikipedia. Anyway, back to the topic...
For a final name for the article, the google-evidence seems to me to point to:
  • National Resistance Front Against the Coup d'Etat in Honduras (no new references needed, since it's an exact translation)
  • National Resistance Front (Honduras) (references required as evidence that the shorter name is widely used internationally in the English-language)
as candidates.
i've reworked the beginning sentence using the full translation first, adding the short version as an alternative. Even if we do finally go for the short version, i don't think that this will need to be modified much.
Ah, the good thing about "National Resistance Front" is that it's short enough to repeat without needing any abbreviation :).
Another point about naming is that it seems to me that "Resistencia" was added somewhat later in the coalition's existence and was absent earlier. Boud (talk) 22:18, 13 October 2009 (UTC)Reply

Renaming proposal edit

See the above discussion first. Proposed names and arguments for/against include the following. Please sign what you add.

  • National Resistance Front Against the Coup d'Etat in Honduras (no new references needed, since it's an exact translation)
  • National Resistance Front (Honduras) (references required as evidence that the shorter name is widely used internationally in the English-language)
    • for:
    • against:
    • comment:
      • "(Honduras)" follows typical naming conventions, since "National Resistance Front" is not so well-known to apply especially to Honduras, rather any of many countries around the world at various historical epochs. Boud (talk) 20:38, 18 October 2009 (UTC)Reply

Any additional arguments in favour or against one or the other? Or better "English translations"? Boud (talk) 22:18, 13 October 2009 (UTC)Reply

Added arguments for and against in the list above. Boud (talk) 20:38, 18 October 2009 (UTC)Reply

Done 19:52, 19 October 2009 (UTC). There are few editors here (so far) and there was no controversy, so i put National Resistance Front (Honduras) as the new name, and a disambiguation page National Resistance Front. Boud (talk) 19:52, 19 October 2009 (UTC)Reply

FYI, I've moved the page because both the official website and the recent HRW report use that name. Rd232 talk 09:55, 15 August 2010 (UTC)Reply

citation needed edit

Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Special:Contributions/12.164.46.51 recently added: "though they refuse to show proof og this signatures since it is widely believed that no more than 10 to 12% of the population supports them." regarding the NPRF's popular support. The wording is a bit weaselly, but if the information content of this can be sourced, then it (and other POVs of estimated popular support) should be added to the article with appropriate dates IMHO. Boud (talk) 21:15, 18 April 2011 (UTC)Reply

Add topic
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:National_Popular_Resistance_Front&oldid=1204206949"