Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Opposition to Castro

Opposition to Castro was proposed for deletion. This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was KEEP although feeling was split between keeping as a separate article or merging, and then there was no agreement on where to merge. -- Graham &#9786; | Talk 19:16, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Personal essay that was previously added to Fidel Castro. Hey, I feel for anyone who's lived in Cuba, but NPOV is firm policy here. Delete. Improve and merge into Fidel Castro
 * Merge with Politics of Cuba. Delete . [[User:Neutrality|Neutrality (hopefully!)]] 23:44, Nov 3, 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep, just because it is POV now, does not mean it is worthless. It can be expanded into a valuable article covering the different groups opposing Castro within and without Cuba and their success or lack thereof. - Taxman 00:33, Nov 4, 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete: I agree with Taxman that the title of this article indicates an article that could be good and useful, but there is no point in preserving this POV rant. What is it in the current article that is part of the future, worthwhile article that Taxman and I both foresee?  I see nothing.  Therefore, delete what's here (why credit the contributor or preserve the history, when we don't want to keep the stuff?) and place on Requested Articles. Geogre 03:29, 4 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep: the article has been sufficiently improved to act as the kernel of a strong, dispassionate presentation of the issue. Good work, you guys, on improving it. Geogre 22:11, 5 Nov 2004 (UTC)


 * Delete. We don't want this crud in the history. No opinion on if we should have a replacement article with this title or not. Do we have articles on Opposition to XX, where XX is various other governments in countries? It would probably be better to list substantiated opponents in their own articles, rather than to have them in a general article. --Improv 03:33, 4 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Editorial. Gamaliel 03:44, 4 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * I've been asked to look at the current state of the article, and I have. It is obviously vastly improved, but I still have mixed feelings about it. The very idea of this article seems to be an invitation to POV, and as others have noted we don't have similar articles such as Opposition to Bush. But properly handled and policed for NPOV, there's no reason such an article couldn't exist. The current article is lacking in a few areas, but nothing significant enough to currently warrant deletion IMO. So I'm changing my vote to keep.  With that said, I have no particular objection to a merge, though its size I think would warrant splitting off anyway. Gamaliel 09:03, 11 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep There is such a thing as "Opposition to Castro". This page needs improvement, not deletion. 216.153.214.94 03:48, 4 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Sorry guy, no voting with an IP. It's register or bust in here. - Vague Rant 06:54, Nov 4, 2004 (UTC)
 * Wrong. There is no rule which says that. 216.153.214.94 07:11, 4 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Deletion_guidelines_for_administrators says that administrators may, at their discretion, choose to ignore anons. It seems to have become convention (probably due to precident) to do so, although not hard and fast policy. I'd suggest if you want to ensure your voice is heard, you register. Shane King 07:37, Nov 4, 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. As the anon above said, the article could work, but not with its current content. It may as well be deleted so that someone who wants to can start over. - Vague Rant 06:55, Nov 4, 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. List the opposition in the main article, subjected to NPOV policy. --*drew 10:11, 4 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Changed my vote to Keep due to the edits. --*drew 04:14, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * (comment deleted b/c I'm an idiot who edited the wrong page - Lifefeed 18:32, Nov 4, 2004 (UTC))
 * Delete opposition to Castro. jni 16:02, 4 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Changing vote to keep or merge to Fidel Castro because article has improved during VfD. jni 07:02, 8 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. A paragraph about opposition to Castro logically belongs in Fidel Castro. If it wasn't acceptable there, then it's certainly not acceptable as a separate article. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith (talk)]] 17:12, 4 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep and improve - I see nothing inherently POV about this subject. Castro clearly has opposition in the world, and this article can discuss that from all sides. If it turns out too short to keep separate, then it can eventually be merged back into the main article. Voting delete on an article you admit can be fixed is dumb, and VFD isn't for NPOV problems nor for cleanup. -- Netoholic @ 21:41, 2004 Nov 4 (UTC)
 * Delete as an inherently POV topic that should get its play in the main Castro article. Lord Bob 22:22, Nov 4, 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep and improve, or improve and merge into Fidel Castro &mdash; siro  &chi;  o  22:37, Nov 4, 2004 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep - obviously should be fixed up (very messy as is) and likely can be expanded into a very good article. Let it grow up some... it's not good now, but not an obvious waste of time/space forever.  Niceguyjoey 00:06, Nov 5, 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. Mikkalai 08:13, 5 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. This topic obviously needs to be mentioned in any good article on either Castro or the history of Cuba, but it is not worthy of its own article. Indrian 17:28, Nov 5, 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. It is no more inherently POV than having an article on a political party. I haven't looked at earlier versions of the article, but as it stands now it doesn't even look to me to have serious POV issues. -- Jmabel | Talk 20:19, Nov 5, 2004 (UTC)
 * I struck through my previous vote upon seeing the latest version of the article. It's certainly worth a merge now. - Vague Rant 00:16, Nov 6, 2004 (UTC)
 * Merge to Fidel Castro. --L33tminion | (talk) 17:05, Nov 7, 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. And don't merge. It needs work, but the opposition to Castro is an important subject in itself, and could have a lot to do with the near future of that island, for obvious reasons of mortality. There are textual and POV problems here, but people who have problems with that should work to improve it. --Christofurio 21:03, Nov 7, 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep as independent article. I agree that it needs cleanup, but as Christofurio notes above, there is no reason why this article cannot be expanded into a relevant, NPOV, and most of all, excellent article.   &bull;  &rarr;  I&ntilde;g&oacute;lemo  &larr;&bull;  06:30, 2004 Nov 8 (UTC)

Comments

 * Ok guys I have put more changes to the article Opposition to Castro and is a work in progress since I am the creator of the article I am refreining from voting on it but obviusly I am working hard so we can keep it either a s separate article or as part of Fidel article. My first inclination is that it belongs to Fidel Castro's article but Gazpacho took it out of there that is why I desided to place it outside. SilentVoice 19:56, 4 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * I still feel that it is inherently POV to have a separate article on this topic. It belongs in the Fidel Castro article and POV issues need to be sorted out and balanced there, that's all there is to it. You must write it in such a way that editors of the Fidel Castro page will allow it to remain there. Perhaps you could start by doing your best to write a second, neutral, objective paragraph on the sources of his support. I am sure he has some. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith (talk)]] 11:07, 5 Nov 2004 (UTC)


 * Comment/Vote: I've stayed out of this one (haven't I?), because I can see an NPOV article on Opposition to FDR or Opposition to Saint Theresa.  Such a thing is more than possible.  Stating that one's topic is a discussion of the history and activities of an opposition group or movement is not the same thing as endorsing that opposition.  Such an article in this case would talk about the Batista interests, how they fought in the Revolution, whether they fled or stayed, whether opposition from abroad has been based only on capital or in bodies, how foreign government involvement led to artificial and natural opposition, and the current state of dissent vs. enmity (e.g. the people in Miami aren't Cubans anymore, so they're not "opposition" in the natural sense that dissidents would be).  That said, I think the author of the article is too close to the subject and too involved in it.  He or she is too interested, probably, to take the step back to give the long view.  It's not awful, but it's not there.  I suppose I vote keep, but without a lot of conviction. Geogre 18:06, 5 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * N.b. "keep" is now my vote throughout. Geogre 22:11, 5 Nov 2004 (UTC)


 * Thanks all for your opinion the article as it appear now with some good edits from Gazpacho an others (thanks!) seems to be NPOV. It should probably be put back into Fidel Castro's article and as Geogre points out its is very hard for me to be Neutral in this article but I had tried and Gazpacho have clean up my mess, I started the topic but I think like Geogre points out there is a lot more to put here I myself do no feel qualified on the subject but I could do some digging on the net and keep adding more things. In my opinion this should be a collective effort and we all can benefit from it. I am glad to know that many of you are very human, and compassioned and do know about the suffering of the Cuban people under 45 years of Castro&#8217;s ruling and Intolerance. SilentVoice 18:40, 5 Nov 2004 (UTC)


 * I have being doing some more thinking about if this deserves to be a separate article or part of Fidel and I think maybe deserve to be both(meaning a small pice like this in Fidel Castro's article with a link to a bigger more complete piece outside with this title). I have being looking across the net and there is lots of web sites explicitly about cuba showing opposition to Fidel Castro's goverment unfortunatelly many of them are in spanish only. Please I need all of you to help me make this more complete so far we are all doing very good I think. SilentVoice 03:50, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)


 * My vote remains to delete this, despite my putting efforts to clean it up. This is beginning to look like Silentvoice's private crusade. --Improv 19:49, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Yes, it seems Silentvoice is determined to make this POV and is actively attempting to do so in the face of my and others' attempts to NPOV it. I still think it is a valid topic for an article, an oppose deletion, but please do contact me if anyone wishes my participation for an RfC about Silentvoice's use of this page. -- Jmabel | Talk 22:33, Nov 6, 2004 (UTC)
 * Sorry!, Mea Culpa! I am not trying to make this POV. I am only trying to add new material. I will stop making contribuition to this topic if you guys agree to it. But I think is important to continue this article, there is a lot more to put in there. SilentVoice 22:52, Nov 6, 2004 (UTC)
 * I've looked through the latest version of the article and, honestly? I really still think this belongs on the Castro page. I mean, information on opposition to Castro is useful, but do we have, say, Opposition to George W. Bush or Opposition to Vladimir Putin? Should we? I don't think so. Lord Bob 05:44, Nov 7, 2004 (UTC)
 * Previusly I created a section called Raw Facts (check on the history) not with the intention of leaving it there but just as a temporary place to put work in progress and to be deleted later so that it will not contaminate the pieces many of you had clean up and made NPOV. I have more additions to put here but looking at the comments made about my additions from Jmabel and Improv I have stop myself from doing so. How should we continue? Should I put my additions right here and if you guys think they are fit then add them back into the main document? SilentVoice 16:47, Nov 7, 2004 (UTC)


 * Some of you have argued that there is no article in Wikipedia of Opposition to XXX and therefore there should not be an article on Opposition to Castro. This is kind of like a chicken and egg paradigm then never will there be Opposition to XXX. Should that be a policy?  If someone does not write the first article and is accepted then there will never be an article called Opposition to XXX! Well, I think it had to start with some one it is just pure coincidence that this someone happens to be Castro or maybe not. Maybe Opposition to him is very strong. Therefore I think the argument of not writing one article type A because articles type A have never being written is flaw. If we are to keep Wikipedia moving forward we the Wikipedians should not slow ourselves down just because something have not being done before. On the other hand there is a lot more to put here there is a lot more opposition groups in Cuba and outside Cuba. And placing all of this in Fidel Castro’s article will not be such a good Idea because it will be too long to fit in there but I also think that some stub about Opposition to Castro something should be place on Fidel Castro’s article that also redirects here. See from the way I see it We as a collective determine what Wikipedia will be like. Open your mind to new possibilities. Yes there is Opposition to XXX being XXX anyone you like to put in there. The next question is should it be part of Wikipedia? To understand Castro I think a lot more needs to be written about the Opposition is like a yi without yan (yin yang)  the interplay between the 2 forces is what take us where we are today. So Wikipedia will be incomplete without it. Fidel looks by reading his article like a very benign dictator. I can tell from my own experience that benign dictatorship or benevolent dictators are an oxymoron. There is not such a thing. How many of you have experience repression? How many of you have not have the right to speak or write what he or she think without the real fear to be incarcerated?  Many of you can imagined this but is a different thing than living it! The facts are that the Cuban revolution since its beginning was ruthless  towards some groups of the Cuban society and step on many toes including some countries there too. How are we to pretend now that this does not generate very strong opposition? Is like being sting by a hornet and not retracting your arm, it  is a natural reaction to the action of being sting! Is a natural reflex. Is very sad today also that the Cuban revolution continues to be ruthless towards any opposition that is why they appear to violate any Human Right and the list grows longer every day. They have not learn their lesson yet and they continue to violate all basic human rights. They had their chance to redeem themselves by opening the country to democracy but they know that they will be ousted if they do.  Castro claims that 99 % of the people vote in Cuba and that Cuba is the most democratic country in the world. Well, if I had say this in Cuba I will be sitting down now in a very lonely prison cell or maybe under the firing platoon. Many in Cuba have the valor to Oppose Fidel Castro and we can see that on the news every day and some of you  want to close eyes and not recognize that such people exist? See reality for what it is. We do no live in a perfect world were dictators do not have Oppositions!

SilentVoice 15:38, Nov 11, 2004 (UTC)

Just a suggestion that these "opposition to..." articles may be useful in one-party states where, in many ways, what would normally be opposition organizations (including opposition parties) don't exist. We can write about, say, opposition to G.W. Bush in terms of articles on everything from the Democratic Party to MoveOn to ANSWER. The opposition to Castro mostly doesn't get to form such groups, but that doesn't make it a less encyclopedic topic. -- Jmabel | Talk 03:02, Nov 12, 2004 (UTC)

Jmabel, the Opposition to Castro can not grow into a big Opposition because as you can see from the list Fidel Castro does not let them united. Like the romans use to say "Divide et Impera" - Divide and rule that is why people are not allow in cuba to organize in groups other than comunist ones SilentVoice 03:26, Nov 12, 2004 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like other '/delete' pages is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion or on the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.