Talk:Saraqib chemical attack

Requested move 12 June 2018

Saraqib chemical attack → Saraqib chemical attack allegations (2013) – The main RS on which this article is based is from the UN Mission which concludes "In the absence of any further information, the United Nations Mission was unable to draw any conclusions pertaining to this alleged incident". Since the source itself describes the incident as 'alleged', and since WP guidelines say 'articles where the topic is an actual accusation of illegality under law, discussed as such by reliable sources even if not yet proven in a court of law. These are appropriately described as "allegations"', and given that it is usual in most countries that respect the rule of law to describe allegations as such, the title should make it clear that it is an alleged chemical attack, until the appropriate legal body confirms or rejects the allegations.

This will also help to distinguish this attack from another notable Saraqib chemical attack that took place on 4th Feb 2018. On this occasion, the OPCW Fact-Finding Mission confirmed the likely use of Chlorine. so I suggest that a separate article be created to cover the more recent, confirmed attack, and that this should be called Saraqib chemical attack (February 2018).

It is also to be hoped this approach will help to address concerns about neutrality Kiwicherryblossom (talk) 02:36, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

We don't need to disambiguate with the year until (if) we have another article that could cause confusion. As of this writing, we do not appear to have articles on the 2016 or 2018 attacks. If those later attacks are indeed notable and we end up with articles on them, moving this article to the equivalent title starting with the year (ie, 2013 Saraqib chemical attack) will be uncontroversial and shouldn't need a new discussion. I am therefore boldly changing the proposed move target of this discussion; if anyone disagrees please let me know and I will self revert. VQuakr (talk) 04:45, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

I disagree. Other editors should be given time to consider the proposals and make their own suggestions. I suggest at least two weeks. Kiwicherryblossom (talk) 12:29, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

Ok, I've self-reverted my removal of "2013". VQuakr (talk) 15:24, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

Thank you.Kiwicherryblossom (talk) 17:09, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

• Oppose insertion of "alleged" into the title lead, titlebox, etc. Intact unexploded sarin bomblets were collected at the site. Yes, the UN was not able to independently verify the chain of custody of the samples presented by France (how could they?), but we don't need to put on blinders and pretend that claims this event never occurred are anything but a fringe conspiracy theory. The UN did note that the autopsied victim of the attack clearly died of sarin exposure, BTW. VQuakr (talk) 04:45, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

I've read the actual French report. It rests on a number of unproven or false assumptions - that the rebels are incapable of making or being supplied with chemical weapons that resemble those of the Syrian government (unlikely), that the rebels did not capture any chemical weapons from government bases (untrue), that the rebels did not possess working helicopters within flying range (untrue), that witnesses did not give evidence under duress (untrue) or were not voluntarily lying. In any case, not being able to verify the chain of custody means it cannot be taken seriously. The UK Foreign Office said it was essential for the OPCW FFM to visit the site of the alleged chemical attack in Douma as soon as possible. so the same principle applies to Saraqib. Also France is a combatant in the war, so is obviously not neutral and therefore not a reliable source. Its intelligence report should be ignored. I would suggest it is WP:FRINGE to regard an official UN report as a conspiracy theory. Kiwicherryblossom (talk) 17:38, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

I also oppose this proposed move because the addition of a year is unnecessary at this time per WP:CONCISE. As I note above, if in the future an article is created about another chemical attack in Saraqib, disambiguating this page with a year will be uncontroversial and a move discussion unnecessary. VQuakr (talk) 15:29, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

References