`::::::::::::You can remove immediately anything that's clear POV, but you have to take into consideration that other people might not agree with your assessment. It is only civilized to give time for people to find and add references (depends on the nature of the claim though). As for ``partial democratic``, I would say that for example letting opposing parities to run for election (as opposed to none) but making it unfair by keeping the mass-media in your control could be considered ``partial democratic`` (or calling miners to take care of the opposition, political influnce in the act of justice, and examples can continue) I don't think even the FSN members would claim that the democracy in Romania was perfect at the moment when they finished their mandate. It's like saying that somebody started to say half-truths after they lied continously: it's a partial truth, but is not truth, therefore we can't say ``they started to tell the truth``  same in this case, not everything they did was democratic, I would have a bad feeling to leave it to ``they implemented democratic reforms`` because that would really be a half-truth. The best thing would be to detail what kind of reforms they implemented and where they failed democracy, but the space is too limitated for such detail, that's why ``partial democratic`` has to do it for now (before it was ``seemingly democratic`` which was more POVish in my opinion).    `