User talk:101.99.7.141

Casualties vs weapons recovered

Hello. I also posted something about this at User talk:113.190.46.134 but since you also seem to be using this IP address (and others) I'm posting this here as well so that you will see it and we might discuss this issue. I notice you have added similar statements to a number of articles, including Operation Junction City and quite a few others. Specifically "However, the losses inflicted on the VC are debatable. The U.S. estimates were almost exclusively gathered by indirect means: sensor readings, sightings of secondary explosions, reports of POWs, and inference or extrapolation. These numbers are in clear conflict with the number of VC's weapons were captured by the U.S. (only 100 VC's crew-served weapons and 491 individual weapons were captured, a ratio of bodies were claimed to weapons seized of 5:1'"[5] What is the reference for the assertion that the figures are debatable? The reference you provide (a US Army report on the operation) covers the losses reported by US forces and the number of weapons captured, but not your inference that they are inaccurate. Unless there is a reliable source which states this it likely constitutes original research or synthesis per WP:OR and WP:SYNTH and cannot be included. By all means we can include the reported figures and allow the reader to draw their own conclusions but we should not editorialise. I have removed this and other examples now as a result. Anotherclown (talk) 12:09, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

---