Talk:1990 Batticaloa massacre

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Sri Lanka Reconciliation
WikiProject icon This article was within the scope of WikiProject Sri Lanka Reconciliation, a WikiProject to mediate editing conflicts caused by the Sri Lankan Civil War. With the end of that war, that project got closed as having met its stated goals.


Sri Lankan authorities appeared more willing than in past years to acknowledge official responsibility for atrocities. On January 31, Sri Lankan army personnel in Batticaloa publicly acknowledged their role in large-scale massacres of civilians in the east, mentioning notorious attacks in Kokkaddicholai, Sathurukkondaan, Vanthaarumoolai, and Batticaloa. In February, the attorney general reportedly issued indictments against more than six hundred police and armed forces personnel implicated in "disappearances" that occurred before 1994--many in connection with counterinsurgency operations against the Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP) organization. On June 28, two soldiers were sentenced to six years in prison and fined Rs. 2,500 (U.S. $27) each for their role in an abduction and murder in 1989. [1]

what is this table??[edit]

when the template got deleted editor is creating tables,and adding them to articles..Some of the incidents in this table is either disputed or could be simply made up stories by eelam propagandists..See, relevant talk pages for further details. thanks--Iwazaki 11:33, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

I hope you can read history of articles. I presume you can read, see this [2]. The table was created long time ago. Long before the so called template was replaced by another template. So please assume good faith WP:AGF. Thanks RaveenS 00:13, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
Most of the events are disputed so unless proven,dont put them in the table..You have so far unable to answer my issues..So instead of wasting your time writing useless warnings in my talk page.,.please try to improve your articles..Even if the events are true, with the way your writing them no one is going to believe them..--Iwazaki 06:14, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Iwazaki, only one of the article on the table is disputed and therefore the table should be fine if we can take that specific article from the table right ??? Watchdogb 14:58, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

I have been asked to provide my opinion on this discussion, so here are some ideas:
  1. Remove the disputed row, as proposed by Watchdogb.
  2. Mark the disputed row, as proposed by Lahiru on Talk:Assassinations_and_murders_attributed_to_the_LTTE#New_more_neutral_title.
  3. Move the table to a separate article that would cover all of Category:Civilian massacres in Sri Lanka, similar to Notable assassinations of the Sri Lankan Civil War. However, such a decision should not be made on this talk page, but by consensus in a WikiProject. We now have two that would be appropriate:
OK we will do what you suggested # 1RaveenS 14:46, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
certainly incident is still disputed..please take a look at the Kokkadichcholai massacre article and its talk page..I will put back the tag per that reason..thanks--Iwazaki 17:39, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

I agree with #1. What he really ment was take off the disputed row (I think only one is disputed) and then after that take off the disputed tags. However, I do believe that the disputed article is awaiting a third oppinion so it might be better to wait for that outcome before doing anything. Watchdogb 20:28, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

I think this article too is an exaggeration of an incident may happened actually..Two sources gives figures over 180 and one just have a single line saying 180 died..thats all !!! isnt it amazing that such a incident is described in one sentence and nothing else is said about it ?? This may could well be quote from the other source,which is tamil net, pro-LTTE and extremely anti Sinhalese web site..And as I have said in several times ,we do not need to waste our time even reading those craps written sum up this, both sources gives figures over 180 are specious and ambiguous..I would like to give some time to the editors to find out a strong evidence to prove number of deaths if not I cant help but to add "hoax" or "totally-disputed" to this article too..BTW, see also sections has disputed incidents and deserved a tag..thanks--Iwazaki 11:01, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Removal of sources[edit]

According to Wikipedia:WikiProject Sri Lanka Reconciliation#Classification of sources, TamilNet is a "questionable source" which should be used with explicit attribution. I'm a little unsure about the appropriateness of removal in this case. On the one hand, the TamilNet citations seem to be merely supporting statements already attributed to other sources, so removing them has little or no negative effect. On the other hand, if the content of the TamilNet article is supported by other sources, that could be an argument against removal. Cheers, Black Falcon (Talk) 17:54, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Dead link[edit]

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

--JeffGBot (talk) 23:39, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Dead link 2[edit]

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

--JeffGBot (talk) 23:39, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on 1990 Batticaloa massacre. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:43, 19 September 2017 (UTC)