This article is within the scope of WikiProject Time, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Time 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.TimeWikipedia:WikiProject TimeTemplate:WikiProject TimeTime articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Greece, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Greek economy 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.GreeceWikipedia:WikiProject GreeceTemplate:WikiProject GreeceGreek articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Economics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Economics 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.EconomicsWikipedia:WikiProject EconomicsTemplate:WikiProject EconomicsEconomics articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Business, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of business 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.BusinessWikipedia:WikiProject BusinessTemplate:WikiProject BusinessWikiProject Business articles
As with many MSM reports, the article seems to put most of blame on the Greek government for the crisis. Less concern is expressed about the impact of banker-led austerity on public service. To partly address this, can we not have a more balanced main title? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.44.107.130 (talk) 20:14, 13 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The current title seems more descriptive to me, since it is public debt, not private debt, which could hypothetically be a separate problem. I also think the current title seems pretty neutral. As I read it, it's not placing blame, it's stating that "government-debt" is causing the crisis; I think that the hyphenation makes that interpretation pretty reasonable. Then again, perhaps others would parse it differently. Natsirtguy (talk) 20:44, 16 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
