This article is within the scope of WikiProject International relations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of International relations on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.International relationsWikipedia:WikiProject International relationsTemplate:WikiProject International relationsInternational relations articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Africa, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Africa on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AfricaWikipedia:WikiProject AfricaTemplate:WikiProject AfricaAfrica articles
I placed the POV tag when creating the article because it is pasted from a US government website. Because this comes from a US govt source it may not be neutral, but I don't have the expertise to judge. (Hopefully others that know more will simply remove the tag if they think the article looks okay.) Mangostar (talk) 22:33, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. With this title, I think a Botswana perspective of somewhat equal length to the exclusively US one presented here would be a balance. Best would be something covering Botswana US relations really written in a neutral point of view.Gallador (talk) 00:18, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well simply adding a tag and questioning neutrality is an interesting approach. The fact the info is derived from a government web site is not an indication the information is skewed of biased. I intentionally left a fair amount of useful information out of the article as it would potentially be considered biased. Things like organizations that benefited from PEPFARF funding, the US role in dramatically assisting in changing culture and making HIV testing acceptable in the public and a normal activity through the Thebelopele NGO. The numbers of Botswana Defence Force soldiers who participate in military to military exchanges is also useful information to gauge the relationship. However, inclusion of both, while informative, coming from a government source appears to be self-serving. But simply drawing readily available factual information is not an indication of bias on its own. And there is no basis to imply it is or to infer that it is biased. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wmwchris (talk • contribs) 10:50, 28 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
.svg)
