Talk:Sexual violence against Tamils in Sri Lanka: Difference between revisions

	; Archives (Index) ;
	This page is archived by ClueBot III.

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 20:11, 8 April 2024

While the biographies of living persons policy does not apply directly to the subject of this article, it may contain material that relates to living persons, such as friends and family of persons no longer living, or living persons involved in the subject matter. Unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material about living persons must be removed immediately. If such material is re-inserted repeatedly, or if there are other concerns related to this policy, please see this noticeboard.

Articles for creation

	This article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC articles
	This article was accepted from this draft on 12 June 2021 by reviewer Bkissin (talk · contribs).

Crime and Criminal Biography Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Crime and Criminal Biography articles 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.Crime and Criminal BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyCrime-related articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Lists Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Military history: Biography / Asian / South Asia / Cold War / Post-Cold War CL‑class

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

CL

This article has been rated as CL-class on the project's quality scale.

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

Associated task forces:
/
	Military biography task force
	Asian military history task force
	South Asian military history task force
	Cold War task force (c. 1945 – c. 1989)
	Post-Cold War task force

Sexology and sexuality Low‑importance

	Human sexuality portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sexology and sexuality, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of human sexuality 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.Sexology and sexualityWikipedia:WikiProject Sexology and sexualityTemplate:WikiProject Sexology and sexualitySexology and sexuality articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Sri Lanka Low‑importance

	Sri Lanka portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sri Lanka, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Sri Lanka 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.Sri LankaWikipedia:WikiProject Sri LankaTemplate:WikiProject Sri LankaSri Lanka articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Tamil Eelam (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Tamil Eelam, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Tamil EelamWikipedia:WikiProject Tamil EelamTemplate:WikiProject Tamil EelamTamil Eelam articles

Tamil civilization (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Tamil civilization, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Tamil civilizationWikipedia:WikiProject Tamil civilizationTemplate:WikiProject Tamil civilizationTamil civilization articles

reinserted Gota quote

I reinserted the Gota quote, because it is an important quote that demonstrates the complicity at the highest levels of the Sri Lankan political leadership (defence secretary and president's brother.) The simple description of it being under Gota's directive is not clearly demonstrated without the quote.Oz346 (talk) 00:45, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Attributing primary sources

@Oz346, please detest from WP:Edit waring. WP:PRIMARY is clear in stating "Primary sources that have been reputably published may be used in Wikipedia, but only with care, because it is easy to misuse them". Which was the conclusion of Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_425#International_Truth_and_Justice_Project. That in controversial cases that attribution must be made. Cossde (talk) 13:49, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Sri Lanka Reconciliation/Sources#International Truth and Justice Project, Sri Lanka Its a RS, and it has been used with care. It is not controversial. Members of the Sri Lankan security forces have raped. That is the mainstream scholarly consensus, it's not a fringe view. This is a far more reliable source than the Sri Lankan newspapers you cite without explicit attribution (again as per Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Sri Lanka Reconciliation/Sources. If this RS is made to be explicitly attributed, then all the Sri Lankan newspapers also need explicit attribution as they have been known to lie and distort (as supported by other reliable sources). Oz346 (talk) 13:54, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NOTSCANDAL, WP:FALSEBALANCE and summarization

@Cossde, Please explain how my recent edits go against wiki guidelines. --- Petextrodon (talk) 15:00, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am unable to engaged in disscussions with editors who have failed to engage in WP:CIVIL. Cossde (talk) 01:19, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reverting removal of cited content from the WP:RS with no attribution per Wikipedia:WikiProject_Sri_Lanka_Reconciliation/Sources#List_of_sources. Cossde (talk) 15:24, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dispute isn't about the reliability of UTHR but adding a content that UTHR explicitly describes as a "grapevine" which is again explicitly forbidden on wikipedia as per WP:NOTSCANDAL:

"Therefore, content hosted on Wikipedia is not for ... promoting things "heard through the grapevine" or gossiping."

Since you re-added the content, the burden is on you to demonstrate why it should be included.

You didn't explain rest of your reverts. I suggest you explain every single content that you reverted and stop edit warring while we discuss it. --- Petextrodon (talk) 01:49, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You are not making sense here. Are you saying that UTHR is relaiable or not? Cossde (talk) 03:23, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Why do you continue to edit war while we are in middle of a discussion despite being repeatedly warned not to. Do you reject that you as the user who adds a disputed content have the burden of reaching a consensus in the talk discussion before you brute force your edit?

Keep in mind that according to WP:ONUS: "not all verifiable information must be included. Consensus may determine that certain information does not improve an article. Such information should be omitted...The responsibility for achieving consensus for inclusion is on those seeking to include disputed content."

Once again, I warn you, stop edit warring and please explain every single one of your reverts since grapevine isn't the only issue here.

As for UTHR, let me repeat myself:

Dispute isn't about the reliability of UTHR but adding a content that UTHR explicitly describes as a "grapevine" which is again explicitly forbidden on wikipedia as per WP:NOTSCANDAL: "Therefore, content hosted on Wikipedia is not for ... promoting things "heard through the grapevine" or gossiping."

Did you even bother to read the source before you re-added content from it, considering your very first revert after my edit was quick? --- Petextrodon (talk) 14:39, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Cossde I'm still waiting for your constructive response. --- Petextrodon (talk) 20:09, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Petextrodon, you failed to gain consensus before removing existing content. I was reverting to return the page to its status quo, before your arbitary dissision to remove cited content, on your personal interpritations. Even your reporting of me did not find that I violated any rules.Cossde (talk) 15:42, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Petextrodon: is saying that this particular UTHR citation is something that UTHR itself explicitly describes as "heard through the grapevine", and that things "heard through the grapevine" are explicitly forbidden from wikipedia. It is nothing to do with whether UTHR is reliable or not. Oz346 (talk) 15:27, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Cossde The burden is on the one ADDING it. I gave explanation and you've yet to give a response other than just insisting it's a RS without dealing with the specific content. And no, I wasn't the one who reported and it was about edit warring, not the content. The admin did say: "although I would agree there are issues here." --- Petextrodon (talk) 20:08, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Oz346, so you are saying that UTHR is publishing content that is un-reliable since it publishes content it hears on the grapevine, that undermines UTHR as a WP:RS. Which means according to you UTHR can not be used as an WP:RS. Cossde (talk) 15:42, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I second Petextrodon.Cossde Please get consensus.Tame Rhino (talk) 14:14, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Tame Rhino, welcome to WP. Please read WP:NOTDEMOCRACY. Both you and Petextrodon are removing content from WP:RS. Cossde (talk) 14:25, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Is it "vandalism" if they engage in the talk discussion? But @Tame Rhino should still explain their edits in the Edit summary. --- Petextrodon (talk) 14:45, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No it doesn't. What you say makes no logical sense. If it tried to pass "through the grapevine"" as fact then it would be an issue with fact checking. But it isn't. It explicitly says it is through the grapevine. A RS can mention it. That's not a problem. Oz346 (talk) 15:48, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think actually reading the source material before engaging in a discussion over it would benefit all of us. --- Petextrodon (talk) 20:11, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Revision as of 20:11, 8 April 2024 edit Petextrodon (talk \| contribs) Extended confirmed users 1,142 edits →‎WP:NOTSCANDAL, WP:FALSEBALANCE and summarization: Reply Tag: Reply ← Previous edit		Revision as of 20:11, 8 April 2024 edit undo Petextrodon (talk \| contribs) Extended confirmed users 1,142 edits →‎WP:NOTSCANDAL, WP:FALSEBALANCE and summarization Next edit →
Line 58:		Line 58:

	:No it doesn't. What you say makes no logical sense. If it tried to pass "through the grapevine"" as fact then it would be an issue with fact checking. But it isn't. It explicitly says it is through the grapevine. A '''RS''' can mention it. That's not a problem. [[User:Oz346\|Oz346]] ([[User talk:Oz346\|talk]]) 15:48, 8 April 2024 (UTC)		:No it doesn't. What you say makes no logical sense. If it tried to pass "through the grapevine"" as fact then it would be an issue with fact checking. But it isn't. It explicitly says it is through the grapevine. A '''RS''' can mention it. That's not a problem. [[User:Oz346\|Oz346]] ([[User talk:Oz346\|talk]]) 15:48, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
	:I think actually reading the ~~content~~ before engaging in a discussion over it would benefit all of us. --- [[User:Petextrodon\|Petextrodon]] ([[User talk:Petextrodon\|talk]]) 20:11, 8 April 2024 (UTC)		:I think actually reading the source material before engaging in a discussion over it would benefit all of us. --- [[User:Petextrodon\|Petextrodon]] ([[User talk:Petextrodon\|talk]]) 20:11, 8 April 2024 (UTC)