Talk:Plan Colombia

message: There was a confusing case of missing units that I fixed.  The original text said: "Peak coca cultivation was apparently 267,145 in 2002 (is this right?? and what units?). "  Looking at the source listed under the fact, 267 145 should have been in hectares.  Just in case the author of the parenthetical comment would like their answer. ;) Columba livia 01:46, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Units

message: the article is poorly formatted, should I vfd? 666 20:26, 28 Mar 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: A bit hasty, I think. I'll list it on Wikipedia:Cleanup, date notwithstanding. --Rossumcapek 23:32, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Formatting

message: Are all those multi-million amounts cited USD, COP, or a mix? –Hajor 01:40, 9 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Currencies?

message: In regards to my edits on the Andean Counterdrug Initiative paragraph, a citation for the Colombia $380 million figure can be found at this Department of State webpage (it's a PDF file). Specifically, the $380 million figure comes from the table on pages 34 and 35 of the document (or pages "38 and 39 of 186" as Acrobat Reader counts it). More specifically, the $380 million is the sum of the totals of the "FY 2002" and "FY 2002 Supp" columns. Because of the way the U.S. budget process works, the budget proposed and enacted in 2001 didn't go into effect until fiscal year 2002. The Andean Counterdrug Initiative went into operation in fiscal year 2002, the first fiscal year enacted under Bush.
The 2004 figures come from this Department of State webpage (also a PDF file). The relevant table is on page 101 (or "27 of 47" in Acrobat Reader). - Walkiped 20:00, 26 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Andean Counterdrug Initiative

message: I'm deleting the sentence, "All these considerations contribute to making the Plan Colombia initiative a source of much controversy both inside and outside Colombia," because it's superfluous and borders on editorializing. The fact that Plan Colombia is controversial is well-represented throughout the article along with the accompanying reasons for the controversy (e.g., the Amnesty International report); so we don't need this stand-alone sentence at the end of the article re-stating what has already been made clear in the article. - Walkiped 02:37, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds good. - Walkiped 01:54, 20 Oct 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: controversial

message: I hope I didnt step on any toes, I started working on this article.  There is a lot of Weasel words which really weakens the article.  In addition the grammar needs to be worked on, and the organization is weak.  I cant do anything more with the article tonight.  But I started.Travb 11:13, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: A start

message: "The level of public anger at the Pastrana government is rising ominously. When Pastrana recently traveled to one drug-producing region to sell the "soft side" of Plan Colombia (economic development), he received a harsh reception. At stop after stop he was greeted by angry demonstrators. And their message ought to trouble U.S. leaders as well as Pastrana. Many of the demonstrators waved signs showing a Colombian flag being subsumed by the Stars and Stripes, with the caption "Plan Colombia's Achievements." Other protestors greeted the president with chants of "Pastrana subservient to the gringos."
July 27, 2001 Plan Colombia: Washington's Latest Drug War Failure by Ted Galen Carpenter CATO institute
Signed: Travb 19:34, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's hard to say whether all the details are correct, without knowing the dates or the locations involved, but the incident does sound plausible, at first sight. Juancarlos2004 19:51, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: "Soft" side of plan colombia

message: Here is the text:
"The results of Plan Colombia have been mixed. From the perspective of the U.S. and Colombian governments, the results of Plan Colombia have been positive. U.S. government statistics would show that a significant reduction in leftover coca (total cultivation minus eradicated coca) has been observed from peak 2001 levels of 1,698 square kilometres to an estimated 1,140 square kilometres in 2004. It is said that a record high aerial herbicide fumigation campaign of 1,366 square kilometres in 2004 has reduced the total area of surviving coca, even as newer areas are planted."
The graph that is cited from a web blog: 
                      	1999   	2000   	2001   	2002   	2003   	2004   	
Total coca cultivation	165,746	183,571	254,051	267,145	246,667	250,555	<-- 1+ 2
Herbicide fumigation (hectares)	43,246 	47,371 	84,251 	122,695	132,817	136,555	<-- 1 (Total added together=566,935)
Coca left over (hectares)	122,500	136,200	169,800	144,400	113,850	114,000	<-- 2
Total fumigation 1999-2004: 566,935 hectares (more than half the size of the state of Rhode Island). 
Reduction in Colombian coca 1999-2004: 8,500 hectares. [2004 (122,500) -1999 (114,000) = 8,500 hectares]
<BR>
<Br>
<Br>
Here is the two graphs from the US government PDF file:
Table 1. Eradication of Drug Crops, 1999-2004
(in hectares and acres)
                                	1999   	2000   	2001   	2002   	2003   	2004   	
Coca crops eradicated (hectares)	43,246 	47,371 	84,251 	122,695	132,817	136,555	<-- 1
Coca crops eradicated (Acres)   	106,861	117,054	208,184	303,179	328,191	337,427	
<BR>
<Br>
<Br>
Table 2. Land Under Coca and Poppy Cultivation
in Colombia, 1999-2004 
U.S. State Department and ONDCP Sources
(in hectares and acres)
<BR>
<Br>
<Br>
                           	1999   	2000   	2001   	2002   	2003   	2004   	
Coca Cultivation (hectares)	122,500	136,200	169,800	144,450	113,850	114,000	<-- 2
Coca Cultivation (Acres)   	302,698	336,550	419,576	356,936	281,323	281,694	
<BR>
<Br>
<Br>
Table 3. Land Under Coca and Poppy Cultivation in Colombia,
1999-2004 — UNODC Surveys
(in hectares and acres) (Not used in estimate)
                                	1999   	2000   	2001   	2002   	2003   	2004
Coca crops eradicated (hectares)	160,000	163,000	145,000	102,000	86,000 	80,000
Coca crops eradicated (Acres)   	395,360	402,773	358,295	252,042	212,506	197,680
"The results of Plan Colombia have been mixed. From the perspective of the U.S. and Colombian governments, the results of Plan Colombia have been positive. U.S. government statistics would show that a significant reduction in leftover coca (total cultivation minus eradicated coca) has been observed from peak 2001 levels of 1,698 square kilometres to an estimated 1,140 square kilometres in 2004. It is said that a record high aerial herbicide fumigation campaign of 1,366 square kilometres in 2004 has reduced the total area of surviving coca, even as newer areas are planted."
1 hectare = 0.01 square kilometer
169,800 hectares peak leftover coca in 2001 x .01 = 1,698 kilometers
114,000 hectares leftover coca in 2004 x .01 = 1,140 kilometers 
136,555 hectared erraticated in 2004 = 1,366 kilometers 
The numbers add up.   Travb 02:56, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: We need to have the 2005 numbers in, as they are wuite interesting, as the increase of coca cultivation to 144.400 hectares..., check http://ciponline.org/colombia/060415coca.pdf for numbers...
Flo 15:16, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Correct facts?

message: I usually never delete something like this that is footnoted, but it seems out of place in the article now that Kerry has lost the election.  If someone really loves this paragraph, they can put it back in, no problem.
::On October 15, a statement by U.S. presidential candidate John Kerry's campaign office and an interview with his Latin American affairs advisor Peter Romero, both published in the Colombian daily El Tiempo, pledged to continue supporting Plan Colombia and the efforts made by Colombian president Álvaro Uribe, but highlighted the need for the Colombian government to improve the grave human rights situation inside the country, by severing any remaining links with right-wing irregulars and to provide adequate protection to all its citizens, including rights and union workers.
Signed. Travb 05:25, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Moved from main page

message: I added this a few weeks ago:
In 2000, Human Rights Watch, together with several Colombian human rights investigators, published a study in which it concluded that half of Colombia's eighteen brigade-level army units had extensive links to paramilitaries at the time, citing numerous cases which directly or indirectly implicated army personnel.
Footnote for the added text:
Stokes, Doug ; *Citing 
----------
Problem is, the actual Human Rights Watch study although it mentions individual brigades, doesn't seem to mention "half of Colombia's eighteen brigade-level army" I am wondering where Stokes actually got the number 9 (half of 18).  I didn't bother counting every single brigade that HRW mentions, does it equal 9?  I don't know.Travb 09:13, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Reading more into the study than what is there?

message: From:
In the final aid package for 2004, 80.43 percent of the funds went to the Colombian military and police. (See graph, below)
To:
In the final U.S. aid package, 78.12 percent of the funds for 2000 went to the Colombian military and police for counternarcotics and military operations. (See graph, below) 
Hello Juan, I wonder why you change the percentage from 2004 to 2000, is this because the entire section is talking about 2000?
signed:Travb 18:59, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Basically. It did seem a bit out of chronological order to quote a 2004 figure, I think. Especially now that you've added a chart that shows figures for the entire decade in chronological order. Juancarlos2004 19:55, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: agreed, I thought you had a very rational, sound, good reason for the edit, and as always with your edits, I was right.  I wish I got along as well with other editors as I do with you!  Travb 22:23, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: 78.12 percent?

message: and it was due to stop in 2005...? so what is happening now? did they make it longer?
damn, i'm lost there!
what's next then?
-Flo 14:30, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Plan Colombia was a six year plan, right? 

message: "with the majority of atrocities attributed (from most directly responsible to least directly responsible) to paramilitary forces, insurgent guerrilla groups and elements within the police and armed forces"
Since 'paramilitary forces' are listed most responsible, it would be interesting to know what paramilitary forces this references to.  Are these named and organized groups?  Are then many different groups or one unified force?  Do they have a political goal or are they just armed criminals?  Are these paramilitaries pro- or anti-government?  
Also, listing them in this way only gives a relative ranking but no indication of the degree of responsibility.  Is it 90% paramilitary responsibility, 10% the others?  Or is it's 40/30/30%?  Even allowing for (presumably) a fair degree of uncertainty, the numbers would seem to make quite a difference to the general picture.  Can some expand on this?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.134.92.97 (talk) 11:18, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  "paramilitary forces"? 

message: I believe that this CNN article on the "systematic and widespread extrajudicial executions of innocent civilians" (counterinsurgency campaign) applies to this article as a result of Plan Colombia: 
-BatteryIncluded (talk) 03:40, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Crime against humanity 

message: A lot of the headings are not to MOS standard.  Here is the reference wp:mos#section headings.174.3.98.236 (talk) 17:21, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Headings 

message: I feel that the article has a negative biased.  I would prefer to see a more neutral stance by adding some positive references.  For example, it is possible that Plan Colombia contributed to the current 60% reduction (UNODC) in cocaine production and lower levels of violence we are seeing today.  Source: http://www.unodc.org/southerncone/en/frontpage/2010/06/22-unodc-mostra-tendencias-divergentes-do-cultivo-de-coca-nos-paises-andinos.html  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.253.67.230 (talk) 22:47, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Today in Colombia 

message: just thought i'd say this is a very good and thorough article. perhaps could use more info on the fumigations and controversies regarding glyphosphate? i only saw a brief mention, with few references to the many studies done on glyphosphate's harmful effects (observed both in clinical settings and in regions sprayed under plan colombia).
96.246.39.61 (talk) 05:02, 19 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it was a good article that needs to be updated. Much of the information about eradication is out of date. According to US figures, Colombia produced less coca than Peru in 2012... UNODC figures say that Colombia produced slightly more than Peru, but the point is that following trends from 2000-2012, Colombia is now producing (or will soon produce) less than Peru. --Lacarids (talk) 00:30, 9 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  good article 

message: Hi. Many scientists disagree with the fumigation section, including those that are researching the effects of fumigation of coca in Colombia in an official capacity for the OAS. These scientific articles seem more in line with [WP:IRS] than the currently cited references (for example the special interest group Corp Watch, a blog entry at Center for International Policy, the not-peer-reviewed self-described-as-radica Transnational Institute, wired.com, or the deceivingly-named political commentary blog "Colombia Journal."
"Considering the effects of the entire cycle of coca and poppy production and eradication, clear-cutting and burning and displacement of the natural flora and fauna were identified as the greatest environmental risks and are considerably more important than those from the use of glyphosate for the control of coca and poppy." 
:From the abstract of [Solomon, K. R., Anadón, A., Carrasquilla, G., Cerdeira, A., Marshall, J., and Sanin, L.-H. "Coca and poppy eradication in Colombia: Environmental and human health assessment of aerially applied glyphosate." Reviews of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 2007;190:43-125.]
"Based on all of the evidence and information presented above, the Panel concluded that the risks to humans and human health from the use of glyphosate and Cosmo-Flux® in the eradication of coca and poppy in Colombia were minimal." 
:From p. 90 of [Solomon, K. R., Anadón, A., Cerdeira, A., Marshall, J., and Sanin, L.-H. "Environmental and human health assessment of the aerial spray program for coca and poppy control in Colombia." Technical report. Inter-American Drug Abuse Control Commission (CICAD) section of the Organization of American States (OAS). Washington, DC, 2005].
[Solomon, K. R., Anadón, A., Brain, R. A., Cerdeira, A. L., Crossan, A. N., Marshall, A. J., Sanin, L. H., and Smith, L. "Comparative hazard assessment of the substances used for production and control of coca and poppy in Colombia." In Rational environmental management of agrochemicals: Risk assessment, monitoring, and remedial action. ACS Symposium Series no. 966 (vol. 966), eds. Kennedy, I. R., Solomon, K. R., Gee, S., Crossan, A. N., Wang, S., and Sanchez-Bayo, F., pp. 87–99. Washington, DC: American Chemical Society, 2007]. 
--Lacarids (talk) 01:36, 9 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fumigation 

message: 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:
::#There is consensus on the talkpage or the NPOV Noticeboard that the issue has been resolved
::#It is not clear what the neutrality issue is, and no satisfactory explanation has been given
::#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) 12:38, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  removing POV tag with no active discussion per [[Template:POV]] 

message: Cyberbot II has detected that page contains external links that have either been globally or locally blacklisted.
Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed, or are highly innappropriate for Wikipedia.
This, however, doesn't necessarily mean it's spam, or not a good link.
If the link is a good link, you may wish to request whitelisting by going to the request page for whitelisting.
If you feel the link being caught by the blacklist is a false positive, or no longer needed on the blacklist, you may request the regex be removed or altered at the blacklist request page.
If the link is blacklisted globally and you feel the above applies you may request to whitelist it using the before mentioned request page, or request it's removal, or alteration, at the request page on meta.
When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags.
The whitelisting process can take its time so once a request has been filled out, you may set the invisible parameter on the tag to true.
Please be aware that the bot will replace removed tags, and will remove misplaced tags regularly.
Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:
*http://www.gratisweb.com/colombiacrisis/europarliamentrejectsplancolombia.htm
*:Triggered by \bgratisweb\.com\b on the global blacklist
If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.
From your friendly hard working bot.—cyberbot II NotifyOnline 15:49, 8 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Blacklisted Links Found on the Main Page 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Plan Colombia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20060318102801/http://www.thenation.com/doc/20010319/cooper to http://www.thenation.com/doc/20010319/cooper
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 22:14, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Plan Colombia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.thenation.com/doc/20010319/cooper
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.altpr.org/apr14/plan_colombia.html
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.aqnt98.dsl.pipex.com/choms.htm
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.hrw.org/hrw/wr2k/americas-03.htm
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.ciponline.org/colombia/aidcompare.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070929122036/http://www.mtholyoke.edu/~cmguhnkn/plancolombia/ to http://www.mtholyoke.edu/~cmguhnkn/plancolombia/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:01, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 12 external links on Plan Colombia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160109132325/http://bailey83221.livejournal.com/54324.html to http://bailey83221.livejournal.com/54324.html
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.colombiaemb.org/repository/Doc_Plan_Col/Plan%20Colombia%20texto.pdf
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.colombiaemb.org/repository/Doc_Plan_Col/Plan%20Colombia%20financiaci_n%20a%20sept%202000.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060526084433/http://www.fathom.com/media/PDF/2184_cocainess.pdf to http://www.fathom.com/media/PDF/2184_cocainess.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061020014737/http://bailey83221.livejournal.com/73026.html to http://bailey83221.livejournal.com/73026.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061020014737/http://bailey83221.livejournal.com/73026.html to http://bailey83221.livejournal.com/73026.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061020014737/http://bailey83221.livejournal.com/73026.html to http://bailey83221.livejournal.com/73026.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061020014737/http://bailey83221.livejournal.com/73026.html to http://bailey83221.livejournal.com/73026.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061020014737/http://bailey83221.livejournal.com/73026.html to http://bailey83221.livejournal.com/73026.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160109132325/http://bailey83221.livejournal.com/54324.html to http://bailey83221.livejournal.com/54324.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060531101813/http://bailey83221.livejournal.com/67064.html to http://bailey83221.livejournal.com/67064.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060531101821/http://bailey83221.livejournal.com/67130.html to http://bailey83221.livejournal.com/67130.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:26, 5 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 7 external links on Plan Colombia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050222205035/http://www.wfu.edu/~caron/ssrs/Crandall.doc to http://www.wfu.edu/~caron/ssrs/Crandall.doc
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060526084432/http://www.cjpf.org/drug/prospectsforpeace.pdf to http://www.cjpf.org/drug/prospectsforpeace.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060926155812/http://www.eia.doe.gov/neic/rankings/totimportsby_country.htm to http://www.eia.doe.gov/neic/rankings/totimportsby_country.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20041130231146/http://www.amnestyusa.org/countries/colombia/document.do?id=176E15103DA508248025691200558394 to http://www.amnestyusa.org/countries/colombia/document.do?id=176E15103DA508248025691200558394
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060824153938/http://usinfo.state.gov/gi/Archive/2004/Nov/23-231491.html to http://usinfo.state.gov/gi/Archive/2004/Nov/23-231491.html
*Added  tag to http://acdis.illinois.edu/publications/207/publication-USInterventionsinLatinAmericaPlanColombia.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071025155348/http://www.accionecologica.org/descargas/areas/fumigaciones_plancolombia/documentos/docu/02-Danio%20genetico%20en%20la%20frontera-definitivo.doc to http://www.accionecologica.org/descargas/areas/fumigaciones_plancolombia/documentos/docu/02-Danio%20genetico%20en%20la%20frontera-definitivo.doc
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060104072344/http://www.colombiaemb.org/opencms/opencms/plancolombia/ to http://www.colombiaemb.org/opencms/opencms/plancolombia/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:18, 10 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Plan Colombia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111218104723/http://www.cipcol.org/?p=36 to http://www.cipcol.org/?p=36
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060902112621/http://www.beehivecollective.org/english/plancolombia.htm to http://www.beehivecollective.org/english/plancolombia.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:48, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified (January 2018)