Talk:Qalb Loze massacre

WARNING: ACTIVE COMMUNITY SANCTIONS

The article Qalb Loze massacre, along with other pages relating to the Syrian Civil War and ISIL, is designated by the community as a contentious topic. The current restrictions are:

Limit of one revert in 24 hours: This article is under WP:1RR (one revert per editor per article per 24-hour period)

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be sanctioned.

Remedy instructions and exemptions

Enforcement procedures:

Violations of any restrictions (excluding 1RR/reverting violations) and other conduct issues should be reported to the administrators' incidents noticeboard. Violations of revert restrictions should be reported to the administrators' edit warring noticeboard.
Editors who violate any listed restrictions may be blocked by any uninvolved administrator, even on a first offense.
An editor must be aware before they can be sanctioned.

With respect to any reverting restrictions:

Edits made solely to enforce any clearly established consensus are exempt from all edit-warring restrictions. In order to be considered "clearly established" the consensus must be proven by prior talk-page discussion.
Edits made which remove or otherwise change any material placed by clearly established consensus, without first obtaining consensus to do so, may be treated in the same manner as clear vandalism.
Clear vandalism of any origin may be reverted without restriction.
Reverts of edits made by anonymous (IP) editors that are not vandalism are exempt from the 1RR but are subject to the usual rules on edit warring. If you are in doubt, contact an administrator for assistance.

If you are unsure if your edit is appropriate, discuss it here on this talk page first. Remember: When in doubt, don't revert!

Military history: Middle East

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion not met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Middle Eastern military history task force

Syria Stub‑class Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Syria, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Syria 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.SyriaWikipedia:WikiProject SyriaTemplate:WikiProject SyriaSyria articles
Stub	This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Nusra apologism

Nulla Taciti seems to be adding every defensive statement of the Nustra/al Qaeda group as fact, while questioning every statement by the Druze villagers, based on a single source. That is POV and not acceptable. FunkMonk (talk) 05:21, 12 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There were only 3 references in the entire article before I added the NYT one. And I put "according to JaN member Mohammad Freezo" (i.e. not stating it as a fact). And this article has the WP:POV title "massacre" when most references call it a shoot out. Nulla Taciti (talk) 05:26, 12 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

First off, I'm quite baffled that you're so concerned about defending al Qaeda's Syrian branch (similar style to Sopher99, interestingly). Second, the NYT is very tendentious when it comes to Syria, especially the writer of your article, Anne Barnard. She's kind of like a still functioning Elizabeth O'Bagy. FunkMonk (talk) 05:29, 12 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm using the available references to fully elaborate upon the event in question. And while I don't know why you are so enthralled with defending a state sponsor of terrorism like the Assad regime, I also don't know who Sopher99 is, but that was an apparent WP:PA accusing me of being a WP:SOCK. Last of all I couldn't care less what your opinion of certain journalist is, at the end of the day, you are just some user on Wikipedia and she gets paid to work at a WP:RS like the NYT; draw your own conclusions. Nulla Taciti (talk) 12:02, 12 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

FunkMonk Nulla Taciti FunkMonk's edit is factually correct when he categorises this article as a terrorist attack because despite the opinion of any of us Nusra is considered a terrorist organisation (branch of Al-Qaeda and on the State Department's list). EkoGraf (talk) 17:14, 12 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I fully support FunkMonk in this matter. HamzaWahabi (talk) 11:33, 12 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nulla, countering pro-Nusra/Qaeda bias is not being "pro-Assad". As for Barnard being "paid by an RS", sure, so was O'Bagy. Isn't exactly a stamp of approval. And as Eko has demonstrated, you have selectively filtered out the Druze villager's account from Barnard's account, and only presented the Nusra claims. Very tendentious indeed. FunkMonk (talk) 23:48, 12 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

More details from Syriacomment: http://www.joshualandis.com/blog/the-massacre-of-druze-villagers-in-qalb-lawza-idlib-province/09:48, 17 June 2015 (UTC)