Talk:Bolívar's campaign to liberate New Granada

Colombia High‑importance

	Colombia portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Colombia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Colombia-related articles 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.ColombiaWikipedia:WikiProject ColombiaTemplate:WikiProject ColombiaColombia articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Military history: South America C‑class

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

C

This article has been rated as C-class on the project's quality scale.

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	South American military history task force

Earlier presence of Bolivar in New Granada[edit]

The article, in its current form, is lacking information on Bolivar's previous activities in New Granada, specifically around 1812 and 1814. Perhaps the current content should be moved towards a "Bolívar and New Granada 1819-1820" entry, while a new "Bolívar in New Granada 1812-1814" article should be created. No promises, but I'll see if I can try to add some information on this later in the week, but in the meanwhile I'm writing this here as a note/comment for those that might be concerned... Juancarlos2004 23:48, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Controversy over the aggregation of the British Legion in the infobox[edit]

Unification of the discussion in one place. (see here) --Muwatallis II (talk) 02:53, 28 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There is edit warring going on over the British in the infobox. It appears two editors do not agree, but have been edit-warring rather than discussing here. Which is what we do when we clearly need consensus for an edit. Alternatively, one of you start a Request for Comment or similar dispute resolution method. Further edit-warring may result in blocks. Thanks, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 05:14, 1 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Peacemaker67 we have discussed the issue here, here and here. However it has now become more of a repitition in the disscussions. Starting a Request for Comment sounds like a good plan. Thanks. Eastfarthingan (talk) 11:23, 1 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Needs urgent review: quality of writing and citations[edit]

This article has two major issues:

 -  Much of the article has very bad grammar - excessively long sentences, incorrect and or missing punctuation. This impedes clarity.

 -  The article lacks sufficient citations. Most of it is just written in continuous prose without any references. Issues of reliability may follow. I know very little about the subject, but someone who does and has good sources needs to urgently review and / or rewrite this article.  Lompom (talk) 14:52, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]