Talk:Jubilee USA

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The page seems likes it was written by a member of a jubilee organisation.

Alansharkstein 13:17, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

If you had said that it was not very encyclopedic, I'd agree. If you'd identified that it was a copyright violation from the organisation's website, I would not have been surprised (though I checked, and it's not the same as their site). However, your actual observation is not particularly helpful. I refer to the Wikipedia:NPOV_dispute page:

Drive-by tagging is not permitted. The editor who adds the tag must address the issues on the talk page, pointing to specific issues that are actionable within the content policies, namely Wikipedia:Neutral point of view, Wikipedia:Verifiability, Wikipedia:No original research and Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons. Simply being of the opinion that a page is not neutral is not sufficient to justify the addition of the tag. Tags should be added as a last resort.

Feel free to identify specific shortcomings on this talk page, or simply make improvements in the main article. In the meantime, I'm removing the tag, which is not appropriate as a "first resort" - particularly given the absence of work on the site in the meantime. - Paul 16:41, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

I removed most of the following. Can anyone explain in English what the highlighted part actually means in this context, so a meaningful sentence can be inserted instead?

[Congress gave a total of $769 million...] fulfilling the commitment they made. These funds leveraged $40 billion in debt cancellation for impoverished nations.

Also, to say fulfilling their commitment, you'd need citations again. - Paul 17:33, 19 April 2007 (UTC)