The version that you keep reverting to is at least as anti-contra as the other version is "pro-contra." The irony is that while the Sandinistas themselves have been willing to admit their errors and have reached out to win the votes of former rebels and their sympathizers, some of their foreign supporters seem to be stuck in their circa 1986 vision of Nicaragua. Some Wikipedia editors are holding to views about the contras that even the Sandinistas don't believe anymore.

For instance, while pro-contra editors like to emphasize the role of the MILPAS, anti-contra editors prefer to emphasize the role of former Guardsmen. Yet even Envio, in its February 1987 review of the contra war, noted that Dimas' MILPAS rebellion was "the most serious episode" of the early part of the war.

On the other hand, your favored version reads that "many members" of the old Guard were involved in forming early groups like the 15th of September Legion. But even writers who were hardly pro-contra, like Christopher Dickey and Roy Gutman, have noted how tiny these groups were.

I've been reluctant to touch this article, fearing that I would just be getting involved in a quagmire. However, I don't think I can remain on the sidelines anymore.  T | C