comment

edit

The lead is excessively positive, rather than letting the facts speak for themselves. Would you like to explain why you think the previous version is better? BillMasen (talk) 12:12, 7 June 2009 (UTC)Reply

Your edit is excessively negative, leading with the statement about poor relations. My version leads with the background to the states in question, to put relations in context. Izzedine (talk) 19:49, 7 June 2009 (UTC)Reply

removing POV tag with no active discussion per Template:POV

edit

I've removed an old neutrality tag from this page that appears to have no active discussion per the instructions at Template:POV:

This template is not meant to be a permanent resident on any article. Remove this template whenever:
  1. There is consensus on the talkpage or the NPOV Noticeboard that the issue has been resolved
  2. It is not clear what the neutrality issue is, and no satisfactory explanation has been given
  3. In the absence of any discussion, or if the discussion has become dormant.

Since there's no evidence of ongoing discussion, I'm removing the tag for now. If discussion is continuing and I've failed to see it, however, please feel free to restore the template and continue to address the issues. Thanks to everybody working on this one! -- Khazar2 (talk) 02:48, 27 June 2013 (UTC)Reply

map colors are mixed up

edit

On the map, Iraq is colored in green, and Syria is in orange, but the legend indicates the reverse.


Is the table correct?

edit

Is the country comparison table incorrect in re the largest city of Syria being Damascus? Isn't it Aleppo? Statistics might be difficult due to the civil war ... It would be great if someone could confirme and fix it.