Talk:Together Against Genocide: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 01:20, 2 January 2012

Please add {{WikiProject banner shell}} to this page and add the quality rating to that template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Maryland Stub‑class Low‑importance

	Maryland portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Maryland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Maryland 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.MarylandWikipedia:WikiProject MarylandTemplate:WikiProject MarylandMaryland articles
Stub	This article has been rated as Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

"Alleged" Genocide?

Hi, is there a legitimate controversy concerning whether or not genocide against the Tamils actually occurred in Sri Lanka? I'm no expert but it seems to me from what I have read and seen to have been a fairly well-documented series of events, certainly there's plenty of horrible photographs and survivor testimonies. Surely the presence of a dispute doesn't mean an event must be described as "alleged" if there's a decent amount of evidence to make clear that it did in fact occur. After all, people deny the Holocaust, we don't call it the "alleged" Holocaust, though specifics may be legitimately disputed.

Or am I missing something here?

 If the term itself is problematic, consider revising to something like "the campaign of violence against", which is less disputable. Or just add a sentence illustrating the nature of the dispute, i.e. "Some people claim reports of the genocide are exaggerated".  It seems to diminish the historic importance of the event and the suffering of the victims if it's officially dismissed as an "alleged" genocide.   — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.23.183.231 (talk) 01:10, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 3: / Line 3: @@
 == "Alleged" Genocide? ==
-Hi, is there a legitimate controversy concerning whether or not genocide against the Tamils actually occurred in Sri Lanka?  I'm no expert but it seems to me from what I have read and seen to have been a fairly well-documented event, certainly there's plenty of horrible photographs and survivor testimonies.  Surely the presence of a dispute doesn't mean an event is merely "alleged" if it's clear that it did in fact occur.  After all, people deny the Holocaust, we don't call it the "alleged" Holocaust, though specifics may be legitimately disputed. Or am I missing something here?  If the term itself is problematic, consider revising to something like "the campaign of violence against", which is less disputable. Or just add a sentence illustrating the nature of the dispute, i.e. "Some people claim reports of the genocide are exaggerated".  It seems to diminish the historic importance of the event and the suffering of the victims if it's described as an "alleged" genocide. Just a suggestion.  Thanks!  <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/71.23.183.231|71.23.183.231]] ([[User talk:71.23.183.231|talk]]) 01:10, 2 January 2012 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
+Hi, is there a legitimate controversy concerning whether or not genocide against the Tamils actually occurred in Sri Lanka?  I'm no expert but it seems to me from what I have read and seen to have been a fairly well-documented series of events, certainly there's plenty of horrible photographs and survivor testimonies.  Surely the presence of a dispute doesn't mean an event must be described as "alleged" if there's a decent amount of evidence to make clear that it did in fact occur.  After all, people deny the Holocaust, we don't call it the "alleged" Holocaust, though specifics may be legitimately disputed.
+Or am I missing something here?
+  If the term itself is problematic, consider revising to something like "the campaign of violence against", which is less disputable. Or just add a sentence illustrating the nature of the dispute, i.e. "Some people claim reports of the genocide are exaggerated".  It seems to diminish the historic importance of the event and the suffering of the victims if it's officially dismissed as an "alleged" genocide.   <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/71.23.183.231|71.23.183.231]] ([[User talk:71.23.183.231|talk]]) 01:10, 2 January 2012 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->