"

My overview

1. Intro: Euskadi ta Askatasuna is translated as Basque Homeland and Freedom, yet Euskadi (a neologism) is surely better translated as Basque Country, in the territorial and political sense of the term ""country"". The term homeland is kind of totally out of place, as happens in some other article. There's no real equivalent for homeland in Basque or Spanish and sounds very strange. 

2. Aims: Mountolive seemed to insist in claiming (erroneously) that ETA's principal aim is to create a socialist state. This is not real, has been discussed before and can be documented. The current status is ok.

3. Secondary tactical targets: 
Drug traffickers (this has a ""citation needed"" mark). I can't provide the citation but can say that in the early 80s it was the case. 
I would like a source for the Leitzaran highway, a more recent case, that I think is not so clear though. 
Possibly the complex struggle of Lemoiz nuclear plant needs its own article but well... there are no doubts that at some point ETA took it as their own circustantial fight and actually were decissive in stopping its construction. This may well justify a section of its own for this particular case but a separate article is maybe a better solution.

4. Context: the entry is ok as for now, unless someone has a better idea. There was a minor dispute about wether Askatasuna (former GG.AA./AAT) should be defined as ""anti-repressive"" or just stated without any explanation. 

5. Social support is a little confuse and maybe POV. There's much emphasis on Francoism, what is surely justified, but the division Navarre+Araba vs. Guipuscoa+Biscay is interpreted from the Francoist POV more or less. After all, whatever the support that fascists had in Navarre and Araba, they fell in that side because of where the coup triumphed. There were only three cities in all Spain where the coup was aborted: Madrid, Barcelona and St. Sebastian (plus partially Toledo and Oviedo), the rest just fell where they got in luck. In this sense sentences like Since some Basque nationalists had sided with the Republican government in the Spanish Civil War, Franco restricted virtually any public expressions of Basque culture... are very tendentious. Francoism attempted and partly suceeded in emphasizing the divisions between the provinces with such tactics as declaring Biscay and Guipuscoa ""traitor provinces"" but not Madrid, Barcelona, Santander or Murcia, that were also in the Republican side. 

The last paragraph of this section is also confuse. It's not clear what erosion may have suffered ""MLNV"" (acronym is not clear for the English reader) in recent years. Sources are needed but HB-EH-Batasuna-EHAK support has oscilated between 18% and 12% (in all Southern Basque Country, Navarre included, where this sector is the largest nationalist one), with ups and downs, and is difficult to count in some elections because of the ban on Batasuna and anything of the like. 

The claims on Iparralde are rather false. More than 10% voted nationalist (mostly AB) in latest elections. But regionalism (claim for a separate Basque departement, greater presence of Basque language in administration, economic institutions, etc.) is widespread, being promised by politicians of all parties in each election and rejected by Paris right after them.

6. Tactics: I reviewed this part and mostly is ok. There's the problem of redundancy between tactics and victims and it seems Mountolive had a different approach, that has been partly discussed above.

7. Government response: the treatment of unionist paramilitary groups is too focused on the GAL ignoring once important GCE and BVE) and I'd like to see some material on the following:
Dispersion of ETA prisioners, history of it and its effects on militant prisioners and their relatives and friends (at least a mention to all those dead in car accidents while travelling to visit their imprisioned relatives). 
Recent legal and judicial steps on practical life terms
General replacement of Spanish police corps by Basque Ertzantza (in the BAC) and its influence.

The rest is ok, I think, though maybe the 18/98 procedure and the derivated ones need an article for themselves. I'd like also more info on the closed newspapers, radios and magazines, tortures to journalists of Egunkaria ([http://www.rsf.org/article.php3?id_article=10179 reporters sans frontiers 2004 report). 

I think you can retire ""controversial"" from Garzón - though I insist that he's actually quite controversial in fact, I admit it may break WP:NPOV.

8. Structure: it's difficult to expand due to the secretivity of the organization but some comments:
- talde means literally ""group"" but it would be best translated as cell or commando. 
- I see no r