Talk:Russian apartment bombings
|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Russian apartment bombings article.|
|Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7|
|Please be calm and civil when you make comments or when you present evidence, and avoid personal attacks. Please be patient as we work toward resolution of the issues in a peaceful, respectful manner.|
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
The section regarding Yury Tkachenko and the analysis device is bizarre, contradictory and unhelpful. First, according to David Satter, he declares that the bomb found at Ryazan had to be the real thing. Then, according to a Russian publication, he reverses himself and announces that he never used the gas analyser, and that the bomb "would not have been able to detonate." Can any of this be substantiated? It's a minor point, but one worth fixing.
Who's been deleting info?
Previously this article had accounts of a member of the Duma referring to attacks in a Russian city before they had actually occurred. In addition there were accounts from the military calling into question whether this might have been a high-level military or FSB operation. Theshibboleth (talk) 08:01, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
- Some of the materials regarding the conspiracy theory were removed because none of the more reliable sources (especially academic ones) take them seriously. Nanobear (talk) 08:35, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Zhirinovsky Duma request about Volgodonsk bombings
Why there is nothing about this? Zhirinovsky Duma request about Volgodonsk bombings? It is very important, as well as other evidences in respective films about those events. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pfQBM2z2a5A — Preceding unsigned comment added by Constantinehuk (talk • contribs) 00:53, 9 October 2014 (UTC)
what can be done with this page?
This wiki is a real mess. I understand its a controversial issue but the wiki is full of citations that have dead links, refer to other material, aren't relevant, and other issues. The wiki text itself has conflicting information and seems to have had too much bias injected from both sides to be salvageable. Is it possible to basically delete a wiki and restart it from scratch? I mean this wiki doesn't tell anyone anything definitive or useful, other controversial wikis seem to at least be able to separate view A and B better, this is so muddled and excessively long and repetitive. Can we do anything here to 'reboot' this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tunafizzle (talk • contribs)
- Thanks for correcting the text. Why did the mention of Richard Sakwa's books go? --ilgiz (talk) 09:34, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
- If I remember correctly, I tried to go through alot of Sakwa's work to verify that he was indeed in the "Russia didn't do it" side of the arguement and I could only find evidence to the contrary, that Sakwa suggested that Russia may have been involved. The orginal ref that someone had included completely took his words out of context to suggest Sakwa was on the "Russia didn't do it" side when all Sakwa was doing was mentioning the events themselves...Again, I would hesitate to put Sakwa in the "Russia did it side" though, at least a firm believer. His work, from what I could find suggested a leaning toward "russia did it" but, again, it was just passing mention that russia could have done it more than "russia did it because X Y and Z". Sorry it took me so long to respond, if you have more questions about it I can look back in the edit history to refresh my memory.
Name dropping in the lead
I don't know if there's a specific policy or something, but we can't just name drop like six or seven people in a row without actually saying anything about them. In other words, some kind of mention of their occupation or credentials to either assert or deny that it was a conspiracy. the reader shouldn't have to click through the article to find out more info about the person. So, like the last sentence features an academic, a "senior analyst" and a "research fellow" but their importance to their authority on these apartment bombings is (very) unclear. Can someone put in some work on this. hbdragon88 (talk) 04:33, 23 August 2015 (UTC)