Talk:The Congo civil war

From VfD:

Ignoring the lacking capitalisation. This page contains material already covered in the DRC pages. it is poorly written, poorly presented, unwikified. Any clean-up would be, in effect, a rewrite from scratch. Better to delete. TwoOneTwo 20:40, 30 Jul 2004 (UTC)

• Delete. Among other things, when did article-writers sign articles with their own names? Dalexcoffin
• Are we sure that there's not something worth salvaging in this rambling stream of consciousness that could be added to Democratic Republic of the Congo or somesuch? It would be a shame to remove an apparently first-hand account of the civil war just because it was poorly written (and biased.) We can fix it, make it stronger, make it better. Pipe the thing through an extra-stength NPOV filter, merge it with History of the Democratic Republic of the Congo in a new section, and redirect. Ask User:81.241.134.96 if he or she is willing to help out. --Ardonik 02:53, Jul 31, 2004 (UTC)
• Ummm, keep only if someone is actually going to merge it with History of the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Rdsmith4 | Talk 05:32, 31 Jul 2004 (UTC)
• We need an individual article on this, not a mere mention in broader articles. This is the most deadly war of recent times. However, the article is a mess at present, so no vote. Everyking 12:46, 31 Jul 2004 (UTC)
• Keep. This belongs on Cleanup, not vfd. The title needs to be fixed, tho. Kevyn 11:23, 1 Aug 2004 (UTC)
• Keep, move to cleanup. Wile E. Heresiarch 23:05, 2 Aug 2004 (UTC)
• This article is definitely biased, but the topic is one that should definitely stay. With reports from the UN or other world organizations, I'm sure I could put together a pretty comprehensive picture of the causes of the civil war, the many broken accords, statistics, and other information. It could perhaps be given a more appropriate name, but either way, this could serve as a redirect. My vote: Keep on Cleanup page Skyler 19:50, Aug 4, 2004 (UTC)

end moved discussion