Talk:Politics of Burma

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Politics of Burma is part of WikiProject Myanmar (Burma), a project to improve all Burma related articles on Wikipedia. The WikiProject is also a part of the Counteracting systemic bias group on Wikipedia aiming to provide a wider and more detailed coverage on countries and areas of the encyclopedia which are notably less developed than the rest. If you would like to help improve this and other Burmese-related articles, please join the project. All interested editors are welcome.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance for this Project's importance scale.
Myanmar (Burma) To-do: edit purge Contribute to recent events articles: 2007 Burmese anti-government protests and International reaction to the 2007 Burmese anti-government protests Create requested articles on Burmese subjects. Improve Top-importance and High-importance articles. Add the newly created category, Burmese democracy activists to appropriate biography articles. Develop articles on states/local divisions of the country and articles on smaller towns and villages

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Southeast Asia, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Southeast Asia-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.
Start	This article has been rated as start on the Project's quality scale. (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)

Contents 1 Missing Information 2 Mistaken Table Numbers 3 NPOV 4 About okkar 5 POV tag in "Political conditions" section 6 New constitution, criticisms

[edit] Missing Information

Having read this article, I don't understand the ideological position of the military regime. What are their justifications for their work? While there appears to be massive support for change in Burma, I doubt the military are ruling without some sort of self-justification. For example, SLORC's name suggests a concern with social disorder, and I think that many similar dictatorships that end up in similar straights have leaders with grudges against outsiders (c.f. North Korea, Libya) who have, in the past, exploited them.

I don't think the article is neutral or whatever. --74.141.133.51 03:09, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Mistaken Table Numbers

The "1990 People's Assembly election results" table on this page is mistaken. The number of seats adds up to only 479, NOT 492 as it appears here and as the source, Adam Carr's website, has it. More accurate information needs to be found. Also, on that note, a lot of the sources I have looked at, including the CIA World Factbook and others, say that there were only 485 seats "available" for that election, not 492. Matatigre36 21:57, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] NPOV

This article seems to aggressively promote NLD and NCGUB, this is in clear breach of Wikipedia Neutral Point of view policy and the article appears to be a propaganda leaflet. I would like to urge all contributors to adhere to Wikipedia unbias policy.Okkar 12:25, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

I don't agree that the tone of this article is biased. However it needs information on the political situation in Burma before 1962. Perhaps you could write that, Okkar? SimonBillenness 12:28, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Sure, I'll be glad to write up, although I'm not sure it would be of anything in favour for opposition groups as it largely centered around the civil war and ethnical tensions leading to Ne Win's caretaker government. This is not my subject of expertise, but I can give it a try. Please try to wirte something neutral and not overtly propaganda materials, if in doubt, please refer to NPOV guidelines. Okkar 12:33, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

You've made a good start. (It feels strange to like one of your edits for once.) I'd suggest that you just include the bare bones of the structure and add historical language from other Wikipedia pages that has been already written by those with a historical bent. No need to reinvest the wheel, eh? I'd be happy as always to tighten the grammar and spelling. SimonBillenness 12:45, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

The very fact that the "West" has imposed sanctions shows that the elections were suspect (c.f. the "Color Revolutions"). Just exactly what is the West's interest in democracy when Bush and Blair have obviously rigged elections in 2000, 2004 and 2005 in the US and UK such that the UK's electoral judge said it would "shame a banana republic". America was against a gas pipeline to China which was approved by Myanmar shortly after China vetoed a UNSC motion against her. The "National League for Democracy" also sounds like another Americanism and Condoleeza Rice has re-used the term "Outpost of Tyranny" that she used for Venezuela with the US having failed to depose the democratically elected Hugo Chavez in a coup financed by the US state department. The NLD was set up in 1988 and at the tender age of 2 won a landslide? Pull the other one it's got bells on. Similarly Lord Browne former head of BP has lost his job and BP has had a number of serious setbacks with leaking pipelines and exploding refineries in the US. BP gets 10% of its profits from Russian projects. In the greater context, the interference by the West begins to make sense and it isn't for democracy.

[edit] About okkar

A person calling a military coup and dictatorship for 'caretaker government' isn't really fit to write an objective article. Zarkow 125.24.209.24 10:47, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] POV tag in "Political conditions" section

I've tagged the "Political conditions" section for POV, as it basically stands as more of a human interest piece in a newspaper than a strictly factual page of encyclopedic data. That the entire section basically sprung from a single editor that never made another edit[1] is kind of suspect, as well. I'm not saying that the data is wrong; I'm just saying that it's not referenced and it's not written in an encyclopedic manner. EvilCouch (talk) 07:32, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] New constitution, criticisms

I added this NOTABLE, and first since 1990, referendum and new charger: Myanmar's army-drafted constitution was overwhelmingly approved (by 92.4% of the 22 million voters with alleged voter turnout of 99%) on May 10 in the first phase of a two-stage referendum amid Cyclone Nargis. It was the first national vote since the 1990 election. 2010 multi-party elections in 2010 would end 5 decades of military rule, as the new charter gives the military an automatic 25% of seats in parliament. NLD spokesman Nyan Win, inter alia, criticized the referendum: "This referendum was full of cheating and fraud across the country; In some villages, authorities and polling station officials ticked the ballots themselves and did not let the voters do anything." Reuters, Cyclone-hit Myanmar says 92 percent back charter The constitution would bar Aung San Suu Kyi, from public office. 5 million citizens will vote May 24 in Yangon and the Irrawaddy delta, worst hit by Cyclone Nargis. www.gmanews.tv, Myanmar OKs charter amid cyclone disaster --Florentino floro (talk) 10:26, 15 May 2008 (UTC)