Talk:Metzudat Koach

POV
This article is written entirely written from a Zionist POV. It presents the Zionist interests, actions and casualties with no regard to similar British and Arab issues.--128.139.104.49 (talk) 12:49, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Hi unknown individual, living in Israel, would you please do a first suggestion on how to improve the article lacking of POV, as you think. Just inserting a POV mark is easy. Chaver83 (talk) 18:51, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
 * We are told about the site's importance to the Jewish settlements in its vicinity but not a word about its importance to the Arab settlements -- we aren't even told that there were any Arab settlements in that part of the country. We are told about Jewish casualties (even their names!) and not a word about Arab casualties. The whole story of the attack is told from a Zionist point of view -- the attackers were compelled to withdraw, made a second attempt, had some success, later occupied the site and drove away the enemy (imagine an Arab story: the defenders first succeeded to repel the enemy, and were later compelled to withdraw...).--128.139.104.49 (talk) 10:51, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Indeed, this article is completely one-sided. This fort was in the Palestinian village of Al-Nabi Yusha' ...but that is not even mentioned! Regards, Huldra (talk) 11:18, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Proposal to merge with Nabi Yusha
This article needs to be merged with the Al-Nabi Yusha article. The pre-48 information should be gleaned from the nabi yusha article, the information on the construction of the fortress and the israeli offensive should be taken from this article. If both sides can't agree to one sidebar, then have both the israeli and palestinian sidebars on the page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.179.118.115 (talk) 04:01, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

removing POV tag with no active discussion per Template:POV
I've removed an old neutrality tag from this page that appears to have no active discussion per the instructions at Template:POV:
 * This template is not meant to be a permanent resident on any article. Remove this template whenever:
 * There is consensus on the talkpage or the NPOV Noticeboard that the issue has been resolved
 * It is not clear what the neutrality issue is, and no satisfactory explanation has been given
 * In the absence of any discussion, or if the discussion has become dormant.

Since there's no evidence of ongoing discussion, I'm removing the tag for now. If discussion is continuing and I've failed to see it, however, please feel free to restore the template and continue to address the issues. Thanks to everybody working on this one! -- Khazar2 (talk) 12:38, 14 June 2013 (UTC)