User talk:Mourner

Srebrenica massacre article

Hi mate,

Thanks for your input on the above. Have left you a message on the talk page asking if you wanted to start making those suggested edits... I feel a bit overwhelmed by how poor the article is sometimes (and its often childish POV slant), so I just don't have the time to start making other people's suggested edits as well as my own! :-)

Regards Jonathanmills (talk) 21:07, 24 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Will do - I will put something together tomorrow. There is a lot to be done on that article! Mourner (talk) 21:21, 24 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'll say! And the attitude of most of the other editors is (to put it mildly) not particularly helpful -- although I don't want to prejudice you against them; I'm sure you'll reach your own conclusions in time.

To be honest, I'm pretty burnt out on it, at least for the moment. If you stick around, though (and Mondeo is another editor I have a lot of respect for), I'll be more likely to at least maintain some involvement in it. Cheers Jonathanmills (talk) 21:35, 24 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There are a couple of other documents that I am checking for the article. From my reading of the article - apart from the fact there is no structure - is that there is an over-reliance on documents obtained via Google rather than using primary sources which inevitably lead to either quotes being used out of context, or quotes being used as a POV or both. The Alternative Views needs some detail as it is rather basic. And also some work on the Dispute Regarding Serb Casualties. I can't promise a lot but I will suggest further improvements to the article. Mourner (talk) 21:53, 24 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, only what you can handle man! :-)

IMO the main problems are inaccurate statements (like the one you identified, where the statement doesn't match the reference provided -- these are ENDEMIC in my experience); ridiculously pro-Bosniak POV (the Serb casualties section you mention is a good example; another is calling the RDC a 'non-partisan' body when it is nothing more than the continuation of the Bosnian government's War Crimes Commission, founded by its president); the needless length (it's just absurdly long; anyone would think it was an article on a world war, not a massacre); the constant use of verbatim quotes (without quote marks, which is highly unprofessional)... ok I'm out of breath now ;-)

Well, good luck with your contributions. I'll try and keep an eye on things, although like I say I feel my energy waning a little (I've always tended to edit in bursts, followed by periods of inactivity).

Anyway, cheers Jonathanmills (talk) 22:03, 24 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]