Talk:Reconstruction of Iraq
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This page is within the scope of WikiProject Iraq, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles on Iraq on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. | |
| B | This article has been rated as B-Class on the Project's quality scale. (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.) |
|
 |
|
||
| B | This article has been rated as B-Class on the assessment scale. | ||
| Mid | This article has been rated as mid-importance on the assessment scale. |
- Here is a database containing reconstruction project information: http://80.122.170.82/ICMOP/
- IMO there is, or will be enough material in Reconstruction of Iraq and U.S.-led occupation of Iraq to justify separate pages, and surely there will be more, as Iraq has barely begun the long trek toward reconstruction
Pedant 21:22, 3 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Geez, whatever happened to NPOV? Where's your reference(s) for wild statements like "...a huge escalation in the strength of the Iraqi resistance"? Nvinen 01:35, 20 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- OK, maybe this article is just out of date, it's saying stuff like "... by Summer 2004". That would explain why it talks about a huge escalation in the strength of the resistance when it seems to me that's no longer the case.
I propose the addition of brief subsections on Reparations (as paid by Iraq) and Debt, under the Economics section, since they both represent significant constraints on the developing economy. -Paul 18:31, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)
--
"Although the water supply has reached prewar levels in some provinces, " Shouldn't this say whether the water supply has dropped (from being better) to prewar levels, or risen (from being worse) to prewar levels? (I can guess, because I've read that generally the situation is worse than before the invasion, so I guess that the water situation is rising from worse towards prewar levels, but I suggest fixing the statement to not require guessing.)
--
re: "Since June 28, 2004, the US-supported Iraqi Interim Government has been recognized by the United Nations, the Arab League and several other countries" As I've just pointed out elsewhere, this sentence has two problems. Firstly, the phrase "other countries" doesn't make much sense, as neither of the two noun phrases immediately preceding ARE countries (actually, this instance is worse than the other one I flagged here, as there aren't any countries mentioned at all, so the "other countries" is really bizarre). Secondly, "several other countries" kind of leads me as a reader to wonder if (a) this means that this is a usual state -- are most governments recognized by several countries (which I doubt) -- or (b) is this an unusual state (is this a surprising lack of recognition), and if so, what countries are the standouts here, and why do all the others not recognize it? That is, it speaks to me of a mystery, and so I wish it would at least link to information to reveal the mystery.
Contents |
[edit] Sentence fragment
"The transitional period during which the State of Iraq is undergoing a regime change from dictatorship to democracy." This sentence lacks a verb, so I don't know what it meant to say, but it doesn't actually say whatever that was.
[edit] Picture:The Proposed Baghdad Renaissance Plan
"The Proposed Baghdad Renaissance Plan" isn't a good caption. Captions should be complete sentences and say something descriptive and relevant (to the picture and its place in the article) could some knowedgeable good-captioner fix that please? Thanks!! User:Pedant 20:15, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Removal of Military Section
This section consisted of a handful of paragraphs of mostly out-of-date information an a few, fairly random, recent pieces of information. I support removal for two reasons: 1) the training of the Iraqi army since the 2003 invasion of Iraq is a large topic suitable for its own article - indeed there is one - New Iraqi Army - which appears to do a good job and is up to date. A reference to it has been placed in See Also. 2) Iraq Reconstruction focuses on the rebuilding of Iraq civilian infrastructure. Military infrastructure reconstruction is peripheral to this topic. Look forward to any comments on this change. User:Dpahlfeld 17 September, 2006
[edit] War damage and general improvements
Cut from first sentence of intro:
- damaged during the 2003 invasion and the subsequent occupation of Iraq
It might be a political hot potato, but I don't think it is universally believed that the reconstruction effort is solely to fix US-caused war damage - or even to counteract war damage in general. The 4,000-plus projects initiated by the US-led coaltion goes far beyond fixing battle-destroyed infrastructure.
If other Wikipedians dispute this view, then let us apply NPOV: state it as a political dispute between pro-Bush and and anti-Bush partisans:
- some say the reconstruction will make Iraq even better than before
- others say the reconstruction is limited to repairing war damage (and they blame this war damage on Bush's invasion decision)
Please help me describe this accurately and (if there's a partisan dispute) neutrally. --Uncle Ed 16:56, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
- Interestingly, a partisan website shows a graph of using some of the Brookings data but with a fabricated October figure of only 2.4 hours - hiding the actual value of 6.7 and omitting the November value completely. The section heading is "incompetent establishment".
- I didn't see anything in that website about the intent of US planners to provide more electricity to people outside of Baghdad. I think the website is using Baghdad electricity as a proxy for the whole country. But ordinarily we don't use proxies when we have the actual data.
- Are they being "partisan" as I think, or am I the partisan one here? I will let other Wikipedians decide that. --Uncle Ed 17:08, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
- This Article fails to take into account the perspectives of ordinary Iraqis as well as those of the sectarian and Ba'ath Party forces currently fighting the foreign occupying forces in Iraq. Therefore It does not represent a worldwide view, hence the insertion of the tag.
