Talk:February 2016 Ankara bombing

Background

Shall we add he Su-24 shootdown? Its basically playing into the country's furthering of direct involvement in the Syrian conflict.Lihaas (talk) 22:16, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

Suspected bombers are YPG...? Really?

The head of the Turkish government has said Muslims discovered America. Should we believe that too? The government of Turkey doesn't even know who was behind the Hrant Dink murder after 9 years and counting, how is it that it knows it was the PKK in under 24 hours? Come on Wikipedia editors, we can do better than that. We really need to sit down and discuss the credibility of these sources with WP:COMMONSENSE and not jump to conclusions. I suggest modifying the Suspected part to Suspected PKK/YPG (Turkish government claim). Étienne Dolet (talk) 10:01, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

Removed per WP:FORUM. Completely unconstructive remark to improving the article's contents.

Reactions

Foreign ambassadors in Ankara speak for their countries and are not "Domestic". If their comments are notable they belong in "International" Davidships (talk) 12:19, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

I removed this all together as it was copied word for word from http://www.todayszaman.com/diplomacy_world-condemns-terror-attack-at-heart-of-ankara_412608.html and is clearly in breach of our guidelines on plagiarism. Jolly Ω Janner 04:50, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

What does this mean?

Likewise, the country has had a curfew for over a month in the Kurdish areas. Actions that have been condemned in places such as Cizre.[9][10]

It is sourced but it is not even slightly clear what the intended meaning of the material is. Could someone either edit the article directly to fix it or suggest an interpretation here? Thanks in advance. --John (talk) 20:48, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

I've commented it out meantime. --John (talk) 09:01, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

Casualties

Perhaps this is not known yet, as this is too recent, but it would be good if this section included what types of individuals were casualties. For example, were they primarily military personnel? How many civilians? Bystanders, or other government officials? 148.177.1.211 (talk) 12:46, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

Since half of the people killed in this attack were civilian employees of the Turkish Armed Forces it should be specified. Just like the way civilian and soldier members of the US Armed Forces were specified in this page:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_September_11_attacks#Pentagon

Using only "Turkish military personnel" suggest that all of the killed personnel were soldiers but that's not the case because half of them were civilians. --Patetez (talk) 16:35, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

Army personnel does not mean soldier, it means personnel. Ferakp (talk) 17:03, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

@Ferakp: I'm just talking about editing the casualties section in order to specify that half of those personnel were civilians and the other half were soldiers and officers. Why are you against such a detail? Also what do you mean by saying they were not soldier neither civilians? Of course they were civilians, they were civilians employed by the Turkish Armed Forces and the others were either officers or soldiers (the driver for example was a soldier and the secretaries were civilians). --Patetez (talk) 20:14, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

Why deleted my subject ?

I can write a script that checks this page and write this subject again and again. I hope you can understand :) . It is Turkey Republic's responsibility to investigate this attack and Turkey's goverment can speak Turkey Republic's behalf. Easy as p => q . It is my right defend our goverment but you deleted my subject. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.46.209.18 (talk) 17:43, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

The Wiki Talk Pages are for the discussion of Reliable Source material for the improvement of the articles - not whatever garbled mess you are talking about. Go back and read our policies and guidelines. 98.67.0.13 (talk) 16:14, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

NPOV concerns

The "Background" section risks becoming both editorialized and propagandized. Its selected content is making connections between this event and separate events and separate organizations that is not supported by sources. I'm not going to tag it yet, because this article is dealing with an ongoing event. Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 22:31, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

In my opinion, the simplest way is to set a minimum standard that a secondary source must cite something as specific to the background. Anything that doesn't cite such a source or deviates from what the source says should be removed immediately. Jolly Ω Janner 22:59, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

Agree with Tiptoethrutheminefield. But give it time. It's still being heavily edited. I suggest once things calm down, we'll make the necessary adjustments. Étienne Dolet (talk) 00:38, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

You don't need to give it time - Wiki isn't a newspaper, and "cutting edge" news doesn't need to be applied to the article. If it doesn't meet the bar, delete it. 98.67.0.13 (talk) 03:30, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

v'ard2read

n October 2015, a bombing at a peace rally in Ankara against a crackdown on Kurds in the country amidst the renewed PKK rebellion following a breakdown of the ceasefire killed over 100 people. On 13 February, Turkish shelling of Kurdish positions in response to "incoming Kurdish fire" and against the backdrop of YPG territorial gains in northern Syria[11][12] led, at the request of Russia, to a UN briefing in which the president of the the United Nations Security Council Rafael Carreno said that all members during the closed-door meeting expressed their concern at Turkey’s actions and called on the country to "comply with international law."[13][14] Following the vote by the UNSC and just hours before the bombing, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan referred to PYD as a "terrorist organisation" akin to the Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK), Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL), DHKP-C and Al-Nusra Front and stressed that the attacks against PYD's armed wing, YPG, will continue until it stops alleged threats against Turkey's national security.[15][source needs translation]+NODETAILSonboming:(81.11.231.39 (talk) 08:24, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

Besides WP:WALLOFTEXT, the above is gibberish. What are you trying to say / add to the article? 98.67.190.104 (talk) 19:24, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

Venezuela, PKK, Soviet Union, garlic and onion... If you wish I may translate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 176.239.69.9 (talk) 19:28, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

Coordinate error

{{geodata-check}}

The following coordinate fixes are needed for

—103.255.4.63 (talk) 16:05, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

You haven't explained in what way you think the coordinates in the article are erroneous. If you think that there is a problem, please give a clear explanation below, removing "tlc|" from the geodata-check template at the top of this section. Deor (talk) 13:17, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

"" Turkey"" Bombing

Your government " monitor" them by different methods. They are aware of an attack. But must be noted they don't now were " they have alot of power's but are limited on budget reason's. They use informers to help.we must step out of our own circle to see how easy it is to blame government for such "carnage" you need to open "your ""eyes to those how have committed it . "Resorting to the like's. Of these offences is power in there eyes " but yet to have power the need the knowledge and I now this because I was in the omagh bombing ! I personally found my self on a path no one new how to help me' iv spent most of my life helping others' to find balance as with out it" We will carry on seeing such attacks? As we pray" for the died' we must reach out to the victims". Because time heals but it never"leave's you horse therapy is one of the most constructive means"" as the horse also needs to feel safe as well hope this clarifies your thinking.

Tyrone dove (talk) 13:05, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

falcons vs hawks (TAK name translation)

Rendered as Hawks and Falcons in different sections of the article. One translation should be probably chosen and used throughout the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:67C:1220:C1A3:6088:49A5:1A3C:6D31 (talk) 20:22, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

Victims

According to Turkish sources, 27 of 28 victims were Army personnel. I added Turkish newspaper as a source. Dailymail has been used as a source, it is not reliable source.  :)

This was already discussed. Remember that Army personnel don't mean soldier. Ferakp (talk) 17:02, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

Order

Can you tell meany Wikipedia page about a terrorist attack, which starts with a false name? What's the logic behind it? Meanwhile, the order has been changed. I think starting with the true name is better. Regarding the source, I can provide a translation. Ayasi (talk) 05:57, 27 March 2016 (UTC)