Talk:Chiapas conflict

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Mexico (Rated Start-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mexico, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Mexico 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.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.


This article contains very little information about the Zapatista uprising itself, which should be the main focus. Charles Essie (talk) 02:07, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

It's odd that the heading includes a death toll, but the article is bloodless - it implies that despite being an armed uprising there was no gunfire. "The rebellion sparked several days of sustained fighting with the federal government, leaving dozens of people dead", according to the BBC. It's as if someone is trying to sanitise the article and present the Zapatistas as a bunch of fun-loving chums who just happen to walk around with rifles. (talk) 00:52, 26 May 2014 (UTC)
This article is not just about the uprising, but the peacetalks, paramilitary actions, and other conflict since 1994. See the Zapatista uprising page here, I just made it. Perhaps there could be more content but it can be hard to find at times.


There is absolutely no way that this article is neutral. The Media Influence section especially presents the Zapatista forces as being simply Freedom Fighters desiring to end the tyranny of the government. This definitely needs to be addressed. --Stephen C Wells (talk) 18:52, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

I completely agree, The entire article reads more like a Zapatista press release, than a proper wiki. After reading it, I believe the entire article may need to be rewritten. There is simply a lot of bias here. It seems to go out of it's way to portray the EZLN forces as the "good guys" and those who opposed them as the "bad guys". Like I said, the whole article needs to be looked at, but the Media Influence, Conditions today, and Social programs sections are a good place to start. I recommend deleting the entire Media Inluence section, because as Stephen said, it is one of the most obvious issues. Also I don't see why we even need to have a section called Media influence here, this article is about an armed conflict, not a political party. The other sections I recommend rewriting if necessary. Secureline (talk) 19:15, 12 February 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Secureline (talkcontribs) 03:42, 7 February 2015 (UTC)