User talk:Snowolfd4/Archive 3
 | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | → | Archive 7 |
Hi
I think you're possibly right. Really, I've done all I can do here, and will tell all interested parties the same. I'm formally withdrawing from the article and removing it from my watchlist. Sincerely, Nina Odell 03:06, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
Kandyan Kingdom
Thanks for the tip, I've deleted and protected now. Interested to see you are originally from Sri Lanka. I only know it from a two-week holiday, but wonderful scenery, food, people etc. Jimfbleak.talk.20:04, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
Work for you
I have a suggestion for you. That is to create the following articles List of massacres attributed to the LTTE, Terrorism by LTTE' because the second article will balance out the State terrorism by Sri Lanka article and the first one will balance out an article that I am going to create. Awaiting your reply. My idea is that one day we can cobine all these into singular articles such as Terrorismn in Sri Lanka and Massacres in Sri Lanka but for now seperate ones will do. Thanks RaveenS 14:07, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
:-D
Yeah machang I saw it. Thanks --♪♫ ĽąĦĩŘǔ ♫♪ Walkie-talkie 21:47, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
Mylanthanai massacre
Thanks for bringing sanity to the situation. I removed all Sinhalese jury because it is defamatory but if we can use Asiatribune as citation why cant we use Tamilnet ? I think bot are admisable as long as they are not used in a defamatory context.RaveenS 23:48, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
Hey bro
There's no any section for Sri Lanka here machan. :-( --♪♫ ĽąĦĩŘǔ ♫♪ Walkie-talkie 09:29, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
Email account
I have added a email account.Kerr avon 03:53, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
Neutral coverage of the Sri Lanka crisis
I love the idea of a WikiProject for neutral coverage of the Sri Lanka crisis. There already exists such a project, Wikipedia:WikiProject NCSLC, and I'm considering joining it. This would be an ideal forum to discuss issues of general interest, such as User:SebastianHelm/Sri Lanka#Recommended guideline for editing Sri Lanka conflict related articles. So far, I have hesitated because I wasn't sure if it would be perceived as being neutral, since the member list seemed to have some bias. However, if you could join, too, then I think we can really improve things there together. Please reply on User talk:SebastianHelm/Sri Lanka#Wikipedia:WikiProject NCSLC. Thanks! — Sebastian 18:50, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for your long reply. I moved it here and will reply thoroughly tomorrow. One question I have so far: What was the originally proposed name for NCSLC? — Sebastian 09:29, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
- Please also take a look at the new project page, User:SebastianHelm/NCSLC or new project. — Sebastian 09:34, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
Question by 74.96.52.171
what'd i do? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.96.52.171 (talk • contribs) 23:46, January 18, 2007
Operation Niyathai Jaya
You stolen that from STF article. Ok Ok no worries just kidding 
. I have some more stuff that I already collected, I'll put those into the new article. Happy Editing!!! --♪♫ ĽąĦĩŘǔ ♫♪ Walkie-talkie 17:28, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
- DONE! Could you break the whole article into parts? I'm not sure the current status of the article is compatible with the WP:MOS. --♪♫ ĽąĦĩŘǔ ♫♪ Walkie-talkie 17:47, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
Anonymous Editor
Hey, I'll keep it short and sweet. A fellow editor came to you asking for an explanation for your warning, at which your ignored him, I think this is quiet wrong. Besides this, more interestingly, you accused him of being a sock-puppet of Elalan, something which I am more interested in as I won't bother wasting my time on such nonsense if it is simply Elalan playing games. --Sharz 01:23, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
Waiting for reply
You wrote on my talk page that you're waiting for my relpy. Where are you waiting? I checked our conversations and could only find instances where I'm waiting for your reply, such as #Neutral coverage of the Sri Lanka crisis above and NCSLC project (from Snowolfd4), as well as your question on my talk page itself, where I replied yesterday. — Sebastian 19:26, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
Sachi Sri Kantha
I am curious. Why did you delete the quote from his book (actually, a series of articles)? I am not (yet) challenging the deletion, but just want to know your rationale for it. Although I have no reason to think that Sachi Sri Kantha is a famous author (I also have no reason to think the opposite), I think the quote goes a way toward highlighting the kind of criticisms aimed at the STF. I don't think it's POV as the quote was not presented as fact but rather the opinion/presentation of one author. If you think it sounds POV, I have no problem with adding that the author is heavily pro-Tamil. Black Falcon 05:45, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
- Hi, the thing is we can't just find the worst thing someone has said about the STF and include them in the article. I don't think wikipedia should work that way. Like I said in the edit summery, if I write something in a book or newspaper along the lines of "the STF are a brilliant organization that protects the people of Sri Lanka and all the accusations against them are fake" will we want to include it in the article? If I was someone important maybe (sadly I'm not :( Or if some top UN or Human rights organization said something like that then yes, it can be included. Otherwise I don't think we should be quoting someone who doesn't seem notable and who is a "researcher at the Japan Institute for Control of Aging."[1] --snowolfD4( talk / @ ) 05:57, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
- OK, thanks. I see your point. Black Falcon 06:02, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
Kohomada machang email ekak hadanne? Mama thaama wikipedia ekata aluth. Leave instructions or something like that in my talk page :P thanks! Damareinu 01:22, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
OOPS! sorry i haven't set up a talk page yet:P i'm still a bit slow, just send me a message however u did before ok? regarding the email. thanks Damareinu 01:24, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
omg im a retard:P i just figured out its a "user page" i don't have, not a "talk page". sorry i don't know any of this technical stuff yet on wiki. thanks man.Damareinu 01:28, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
oyata mage email eka hambawunaa dha?
Colombo Pictures
Hi there, waiting to see the images you have of Colombo. If they are ready please post them with a <gallery> in the talk page and then lets discuss which ones to use. thank you for working on the article. ŇëŧΜǒńğëŗTalk 17:02, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
Hi snowolfd4,
I see you and RaveenS revert warring on this template.. I know its all fun to do this revert warring without discussing anything in the talk page.. (he he he..). But next time when you revert would you mind keeping the rest of the wikipedia, informed as to whats the problem is? (ha ha ha) ŇëŧΜǒńğëŗTalk 06:13, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
Snow both articles were waiting to get into an edit war today or tomorrow hence I proactively merged them without any attributions. I created them both to balance Wikipedia but now I think we should simply have one article without any attributions. Those who want to expand them can write about the individual victims and let us know who may have killed them. Hope you like itRaveenS 14:41, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
Hi Snowolf,
I appreciate your work on the allegations of mass graves at Chemmani article. I have a couple of quibbles, however, that I'm hoping that we can reach an agreement on.
In the interest of NPOV, I think that it's important not to reproduce text word-for-word from a press release without quoting it. I'm open to how exactly this is handled, and I agree that my earlier edit (using "claimed") wasn't adequate. I think "cited the unanimous decision", however, has the effect of making it clear that the description of "local and foreign experts" belongs to the government of Sri Lanka -- an important detail -- without casting any aspersions on that source. Regarding the quotation marks -- it is in fact an attributed statement! Let's present it as such.
I agree that the statement that the soldiers have not been "brought to trial" is too ambiguous. How can we better express that although they have been charged, they were released on bail and have not been tried?
Thanks for your consideration, -- Shunpiker 22:56, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for the revision. I think the new wording helps to establish a respectful distance between the article and the source. I see just one remaining issue: Is there some way to untangle the ambiguity of "no graves as originally alleged"? There is a lot of room for interpretation in that phrasing. For example, that statement would also be true if no graves and no bodies were found at all. I think it is important to be clear about the discrepancy between Cpl. Rajapakse's allegations and what the investigators uncovered without minimizing the seriousness of the fact that some bodies were found. This is the same reason that I originally put "no such graves as originally alleged" in quotes. That said, I agree that there are ways to address the problem without making use of a direct citation. (Given that it's already included in entirety further on in the article.)
- On a trivial note, I don't think "either" adds anything to "there was not evidence of grave tampering". Am I missing a nuance?
- That newspaper article that you linked on my talk page has good information for the article. I think that's the first source I have read that named the people who were charged. --Shunpiker 19:41, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
9/11 Reversion
Your recent reversion to September 11, 2001 attacks contained an edit summary of "←Undid revision 108808891 by Lovelight (talk) - there is already an article about this", I just wanted to point out that the entire article is made up of content pulled from subarticles if you were not aware. Happy Wikiediting. --NuclearZer0 11:56, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
Calling Asian Tribune "Anti-rebel"
Just letting you know that I replied to your message and moved it to User talk:SebastianHelm/Sri Lanka#Calling Asian Tribune "Anti-rebel". Cheers! — Sebastian 20:59, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the lovely user box
Excellent work machan..I already have it in my user page ! あいがとう.おおきに ！ --Iwazaki 02:58, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
- Hmmm........yeah me tooooo
--♪♫ ĽąĦĩŘǔ ♫♪ walkie-talkie 17:07, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
Ilayathambi Tharsin..Who ???
machan, I have never ever heard her name..If she is notable,every single rape victim in the world is notable,not to mention all the 18,000 child soldiers recruited by the LTTE. 2005 alone there were 191,670 victims of rape, attempted rape or sexual assaults according to the 2005 National Crime Victimization Survey..we are not crazy enough to make 200,000 articles,aren't we ?? Also ,Look at the citations , Home for Human Rights ?? an LTTE proxy..And the beloved Tamil canadian..Deserve an AFD. --Iwazaki 02:07, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
Flag
Hi machang, just wondering about the flag, i read somewhere that the gold/yellow background of the lankan flag is representing the maha sangha...not sure if its right..but sorta makes sense. also if u have any additional info please tell me...i just took some time to see how beautiful our flag really is..(reply with info on my email ok?) thanks Damareinu 08:42, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
Colombo
Hey Snowolfd4, I was editing the Colombo article, and removed the Old parliament building picture to move to the government and politics section.. guess what? the database was locked at the moment!!!... I am not able to revert or include the picture because of this. I wont be doing any editing during the weekend, and signing off for the day, could you please revert it for me. Thanks in advance :O) ŇëŧΜǒńğëŗTalk 12:58, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
Trincomalee Massacre page
Hi there - just wondering why you undid my Feb 28 edit - my edit reflects the reality better, as Ivan Shearer was NOT invited to look into the Trinco incidents specifically. I will revert to my version, and would be happy if you choose not to change that wiithout good arguments.
Thanks, Neuralolive 02:55, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
Any luck with the merge? --♪♫ ĽąĦĩŘǔ ♫♪ walkie-talkie 15:44, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
- hmm... lets look into that later, we have lots of work rather than that no
--♪♫ ĽąĦĩŘǔ ♫♪ walkie-talkie 15:59, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
thankx
hi macho.. i am dinesh
thankx ur co operation keep in touch
♣ —The preceding unsigned comment was added by DINESHDEEP77 (talk • contribs) 06:28, 4 March 2007 (UTC).
If you want to remove the section of Human rights allegations, do it through WP:BIAS. Your action of removing the section in the way you did is not welcomed. Thaks for all your constructive contributions to Wikipedia and wishing to see your further contributions. --Sechzehn (talk · contribs) 01:41, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
Please relax
Hello Snowolfd4,
You know, I'm here as a mediator. You know how I came here, through the LTTE mediation, which ended with a compromise that was very close to what you had wanted. Therefore, please don't lose faith in me when I disagree with you occasionally. Right now, there will be more disagreements than usual. This is to be expected. It just so happens that the other side has voluntarily stepped back on reverting, while you and some others did not honor that generous gesture, so we ended with an imbalance that is not fair. This is natural; in the long run, in Wikipedia things will always balance out. My task as a mediator is not to force any opinions on Wikipedia, but to gently help both sides understand that natural process.
For Wikipedia and the mediation, it is vital that people assume good faith, and give each other reason to do so. (See User talk:Iwazaki#The Sri Lanka conflict, game theory and mediation for details.) I'm here to help others assume good faith in you. You are the best person to help me with this.
I noticed that you repeatedly wrote that you absolutely don't see other people's point. You are an aviation engineer, so I don't think you're lacking the intellectual capacity to understand me. It seems, you are just a bit agitated these days. Please, therefore, relax. Take a deep breath, go for a walk, and remember that I'm not here to get you.
When you are relaxed, please reread what I wrote. Write down what it is concretely that you don't understand. I'm not perfect, I may have made mistakes, too. I will certainly try to answer your questions honestly; and if there's something wrong in my argumentation then I'll readily admit it.
Please help me improve the good faith people can put in you. — Sebastian 03:29, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
reply originally on User talk:SebastianHelm
Sebastian,
Thanks for your advice, and I'm sorry I still couldn't reply to you're email, cos I was busy this week, and doing mainly maintenance tasks. I'll get down to it as soon as I can.
About what I said on the Anton Balasingham talk page, I just don't see how WP:N, which dictates whether a subject is notable enough to have an article about is relevant to that one section. If we had an article "criticism of Anton Balasingams funeral" that would fail WP:N.
And when I said I don't understand what you said in the Army article, I honestly meant it. My point was that human rights violations were not included in the Japanese Army article since there are separate articles for that, and similarly they shouldn't be included in the Sri Lanka Army article either. And your reply was to provide links to those separate articles, which was completely beyond my point, and actually reinforced what I said. And I still don't see where WP:BIAS fits in to all of this.
I'm sorry if I sounded too harsh on either occasion, and if you took it the wrong way.
You say the "other side" has stepped back on reverting? It certainly doesn't appear so. You should take a look at the Anton Balasingham page history to see my point.
And finally Sebastian I have not totally lost faith in your edits, and I respect your opinion, but I kindly ask that you read what I say clearly and make sure you understand exactly what my point is before replying. Thanks. --snowolfD4( talk / @ ) 04:46, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
- Thank you for your reply on my talk page. I just got home; it's really late here, and I will reply tomorrow. I would like to keep the conversation together; would you prefer if I moved your reply here or should we keep it on my talk page? (In the latter case, I'd like to move it to my Sri Lanka talk page.) — Sebastian 10:31, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
- I wouldn't mind keeping it apart, but if you want the conversation together that's fine. My watchlist is really packed and I keep missing some stuff and I really can't afford to watch too many other pages, so do you mind if we move it to my talk page?. If you want we can move it to your page when we're done. And by all means take your time, and reply when you are free. Thats perfectly alright with me. --snowolfD4( talk / @ ) 10:37, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
- Re the Balasingham talk; The policy may have been written with only articles in mind. I could argue with you about that, but I'm happy that the discussion there found a compromise, so I prefer to just leave it at that. WP:BIAS was a misunderstanding; I'll reply to that on Talk:Sri_Lanka_Army#HR section. — Sebastian 03:37, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
You have been accused of attempting to hack into his account, by this user. Your view of this matter is requested. --KZ Talk • Vandal • Contrib 09:03, 10 March 2007 (UTC)